News and views of Constance Cumbey concerning "Radical Middle", New Age Movement, Communitarianism, "planetary humanism," "global governance," European Union, Javier Solana, Jeremy Rifkin, "New Age Politics," law in the USA, combined with life in general -- sometimes humorous, sometimes not!
Pages
▼
Sunday, July 12, 2020
Signs of the time - Church Burned With People Inside: 3 Phases of Persecution
Dr. Taylor Marshall who is the person in the second video above posted this video today about two churches sabotaged yesterday. Most of us will not agree with his theology, emphasis on relics, etc., but there is no mistaking the importance of recognizing that anti-God and anti-Church persecution is growing. Churches being burned with people inside -- apparent very dangerous times we are entering.
I'm also thinking about the McCloskey family in St. Louis, Missouri who have been on the news several times lately as angry mobs surrounded their obviously elegant large home. Mobs were screaming that they were going to occupy rooms in their home. Their calls to 911 were ignored and when they finally went out with their rifles to show they would defend their home, the local prosecutor instead requested and obtained a warrant to seize their rifles and charge them with "feloious assault" for the "crime" of defending their own property.
The spirit of mob violence has clearly been unleashed and unless God holds it back, things will increase to the level mentioned by the priest in the first video above.
I will blog the video about the churches burning. To be certain, it is loaded with traditional Catholic rhetoric, but as a sign of the times, it is crucial information that certainly is not getting major media attention it deserves.
Bill Gates company called ID 2020 and the UN along with technology developed by MIT Plan to MARK all humans in 2020 please watch this short video by HWAV (headlines with a voice) called: Will You Take The Mark? also found in the HWAV website
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLReSUVjMx4
other videos that are chilling of HWAV: Project Pelican: They Sold Out Our Navy: and What was destroyed in the Clinton House fire
Correct me if I am wrong, but did not Blacks not even have to fight for their freedom because a bunch of Whites did that for them in the American War Between The States, where over 700,000 Whites died ensuring the Black man’s freedom. REPARATIONS PAID IN FULL. Matter of fact some things never change because ignorant Whites and other outcasts still fight for Blacks in the year 2020, although it is the Whites who are enslaved this time around and the Blacks who are the privileged class. I know this sounds retarded but America in 2020 is retarded. When you consider that the AFRICANS IN AMERICA were originally bought and sold by their own people, so it isn’t as if the White man went to Africa and captured free Africans, they were already enslaved and more than likely brutalized far worse by their own, than the White man.
Welfare generation after generation, affirmative action laws that have allowed unqualified Blacks to receive jobs over better qualified Whites, etc. REPARATIONS PAID IN FULL AND THEN SOME, THE BLACKS NOW OWE WHITES.
Destruction of our major cities, MILLIONS of White victims over the years to Black violence. How many Whites have been raped, murdered or beaten at the hands of Blacks from 1865-2020, IT WOULD TOTAL MILLIONS. White cops killing or beating Blacks? Compare that number to the number of White cops who have been beaten or killed by Black thugs or better yet, compare that number to the number of Whites killed by cops.
I think Blacks have been paid their reparations and then some and THEY OWE US and THEIR ANCESTORS, if not for being shipped from Africa, most would be living in squalor and swatting flies from their face while they dropped a deuce on their dirt floor. This is nothing but more EXTORTION AND THEY LEARNED THOSE TECHNIQUES FROM THE KING OF EXTORTION RACKET. You wanna guess who the king of the extortion racket is?
The African American soldiers who served in the United States army and navy during the Civil War made great sacrifices for the nation. The highest number of black soldiers serving at one time during the Civil War was 186,017 men...
[But at first they were denied even the right to fight by a prejudiced public and a reluctant government.]
Constance, it's interesting that the mainstream news media failed to mention that these mobs were screaming that they were going to 'occupy rooms' in the McCloskey's home!!! With the media's careful 'editing'... instead, the story became all about this couple appearing to 'threaten' the mob with their guns.. as if this couple was unnecessarily behaving in a paranoid manner against 'peaceful' protesters. OUTRAGEOUS!!!
West Texas doctor reverses coronavirus symptoms in 100% of cases with inexpensive treatment
Dr. Richard Bartlett shares his $200 treatment: enhaling a steroid called budesonide, using a nebulizer, with many patients experiencing a rapid relief from Covid symtoms after the first treatment.
I am Not Kris Erikson and African culture was and is better than shitting on the floor.
Craig, I didn't say or think JEsus is the same as the Father in a physical way, but that they are alike in every way but distinct persons. There is a prohibition on trying to depict The Father, but it got done two or three times anyway.
you agree with the point about honoring what a flag or other image is about, not the image itself, then I don't see the problem in honoring icons of saints or of Jesus.
God made Jesus His image, so I don't see why we can't make images of Jesus. The earliest images are kind of not that recognizeable except by designation or action, but some time after the images on the Veil of Veronica and shroud that later became known as The Shroud of Turin (C14 dates are compromised by the smoke and mending portions from a fire it survived) then certain specific points develop in art that match these. The blood type on them match also.
LUKE 24:16 "BUT THEIR EYES WERE RESTRAINED, SO THAT THEY DID NOT KNOW HIM" supernatural prevention of recognizing Him, not a change about Him, Mary MAgdalene recognized Him instantly when she LOOKED directly at Him she thought He was the gardner when she was crying, eyes full of tears and just noting someone there then He spoke to her. Of course her assumption would be it was only someone similar at first, since Resurrection wasn't expected. Paul says at least 500 other people saw Him and knew obviously it was Him or this wouldn't be relevant.
Washington Redskins Officially Announce Name Change
The National Football League's Washington Redskins officially announced Monday that they will change the team's 87-year-old name that activists have claimed is offensive to Native Americans.
Craig it's interesting on the last thread you posted about Trump's meeting at Gateway Church. You had also asked me for evidence of the seven mountain mandate infecting the white house. It's certainly alive and well at Gateway Church. Bob is a heretical prosperity gospel charismania false teacher.
Here's a quote from Robert Morris:
"And please understand, if you don’t tithe that’s an open door to demons. Because that is exactly what the enemy does. He’s a thief. And you’re allowing god. You’re robbing- you’re allowing satan to get you to be a thief. But not only a thief but to steal you from God. And I don’t say that to make you feel condemned or to argue about tithing, I’m telling you, that’s an open door. No matter how many doors you close in your life. If you’re not tithing, you’ve always got an open door to the demons.” – Robert Morris, “Non-tithers OPEN THE DOOR TO DEMONS!!” Says False Teacher Robert Morris, YouTube, Published by Exit Churchianity on Oct 8, 2013."
Bishop Jackson has long been a charismania false teacher advocating 7 mountain mandate and claiming to be a prophet of God. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmKOcza_UyQ
Trump is not very discerning when it comes to surrounding himself with true Christians. Here's a partial list of false teachers that visited the white house: https://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowell/2019/12/list-of-worship-leaders-gathering-at-the-white-house-on-friday-dec-6-2019.html
Even the secular world has figured out it's something else besides real Christianity. https://theoutline.com/post/8856/seven-mountain-mandate-trump-paula-white?zd=1&zi=tshvgojc
Your comment only provides a 'guilt-by-association' "evidence". I want actual proof that Trump adheres to the 7 Mountains mandate. Does he advance policy that reflects this? Not that I've seen, but I'm willing to be shown that it exists.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14
The law God gave Moses at Sinai is the truth. The truth of what is righteous and holy, perfect, telling us how to perfectly relate to God and our fellow man. It has told us the truth about ourselves, we cannot keep it, only break it. That holy and true standard we could not keep, but Jesus Christ, God come in the flesh, did. So He kept it in our behalf, that His grace could, would, afford us forgiveness, therefore giving us our right standing with God in truth once again. Jesus, the Son, is the truth, and He is grace, perfectly balanced, and when He finished His salvation work on the earth, then He was seated at the right hand of God the Father, and there He is today. His Spirit, equally God, comes to dwell in the believer by faith, when we see ourselves in the law we have broken and repent before God, who looks at Jesus in our stead and counts us righteous by that blood that paid the debt of the law we broke. The Spirit's indwelling the heart of persons, sanctifies us, makes us, merely human, but forgiven human beings, justified at the moment we trust Jesus, able to keep the law of God in the strength of God. It is the mystery of Christ in you, in me, when we believe, law and grace housed together, the Lord at home in our hearts. We are given great grace and space to come to God through Jesus our Savior, but we have a free will that can refuse what Jesus paid to freely give us. It is appointed unto man once to die and then the judgment. Hebrews 9:27
What grace cannot humble, judgment must befall. Be humbled by His law, that you may receive grace and live... ...today do not harden your heart.
John 1:12 is for someone reading this: But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.
First, when you see a large gathering of lions, you can presume the leader of the pack is also a lion.
These bethel'ites have their hooks deep into Trump and he eats up their praise and Lance Wallnau's "Cyrus anointing" with narcissistic delight. Just him running around at their whim to conferences and such and leaning into these false teachers as actual advisors even on completely secular matters is evidence of 7MM behavior. He has elevated these charismania wolves and adulterers to the top of the government and military "mountains".
Further - the 7MM take over is supposed to be a ninja operation. They are not wearing name tags and grabbing microphones. Lance Wallnau asserts Satan is in control of academia, entertainment, politics and business: “Our real enemies are the ones that are shaping laws, shaping media, and shaping the next generation". To fight them, he’s promoting what he calls the ‘7M Underground’ — an affiliation of producers, directors, attorneys, politicians and economists." Wallnau continues: “I’m working with believers that I call ninja sheep — those are believers that are actual believers but have to maintain discretion with their public profile."
Other evidence: Betsy Devos -- Education Secretary - conquering the education kingdom for God.
Betsy is an elder at false teacher, Rob Bell's, Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Michigan. After Bell left she largely funded his odd Nooma film series.
DeVos in 2001 listed education activism and reform efforts as a means to "advance God's Kingdom". In an interview that year, she also said that "changing the way we approach ... the system of education in the country ... really may have greater Kingdom gain in the long run".
Just read this and you should recognize this is all 7MM agenda material. It may sell well to the undiscerning true Christians; but these new age charismaniacs are just pretending here. They want secular government largely out of the education business and open up funding avenues and opportunities for private [mostly white] religious schools to take over (i.e. - the religious take over of education).
Also don't forget, Betsy DeVos's brother, Erik Prince, a former U.S. Navy SEAL officer, is the founder of Blackwater USA, a theocratic mercenary private military services contractor, much like Hitler's Sturmabteilung (Brown Shirts) have been resurrected by Trump's administration.
Finally, 7MM policies and practices have some interesting parallels with Marxism. http://www.evangelicalreview.com/01-2018_ter_tanksley-&-schaich_'marxist-7mm.pdf
The Devos foundation has extensive ties to dominionists.
First I came upon the Liberty Institute. They sound great to the typical Christian. Fighting against religious persecution sounds great. They hide their new age dominionist beliefs deep inside. But founder Kelly Shackelford started out at Jim Whitehead, Rutherford Institute in Virginia. The Rutherford Institute was funded largely by Richard and Helen Devos and was dedicated to the concept of "Christian Reconstructionism" (aka "Dominionism"). Mr. Shackelford left the Rutherford Institute to set up his own legal firm, now called the "Liberty Institute" in Austin, Texas, now "First Liberty Institute". Mr. Shackelford even gave the video message this past July 5th at the heretic, Roger Morris's Gateway Church in Texas. If you are familiar with dominionist/7MM concepts you can hear it in his "message"; but if you aren't --- he sounds like he's doing wonderful work for God. Here's Shackelford on video with heretic Andrew Wommack's "Truth and Liberty Live" broadcast where the into flat out affirms their 7 spheres of influence/mountain agenda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpIt3D_o_XY
How does this tie to Trump? These people and groups all tie into the Federalist Society. Trump has appointed a boatload of federal judges out of this dominionist cover "society". This cult member was even appointed for life by Trump to a Federal District Court judgeship right out of Shackelford's offices. https://firstliberty.org/news/taking-the-oath/
Further, the Devos Foundation gave $5,000,000 to fund the work of dominionist, D. James Kennedy (deceased in 2007) of the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Ft. Lauderdale. You may be more familiar with his ecumenical dominionist organization, Truth in Action. Here's some info on them: https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/transforming_culture_beware.html
Dick Devos (along with Edgar Prince) was a founding member of the Council for National Policy launched right out of the John Birch Soceity. This website has discussed and debated the evil of the CNP for years.
Face it - the "Religious Right" was a largely new age pentecostal "dominionist" political organization set out to create an extra-biblical ecumenical Theocracy in America. It is/was not of God. God does not need us seizing political power or making his return happen. ........ But maybe it will be ok if we just apply the Trump and Devos family pastor Norman V. Peale's power of positive thinking. Covid-19 will magical disappear, all the jobs and more are coming back, the stock market is tremendous, we are doing awesome and our country is "prospering" and "healed". Look around at how "great" Trump is making America.
- Kennedy is a proponent of the teaching known as the Gospel in the Stars, which is nothing more than a "Christian" interpretation of astrology and occultism, in much the same class as so-called "Biblical" pyramidology and numerology. In fact, Kennedy even calls this teaching "Biblical astrology." The following is excerpted from a 1992 brochure promoting Kennedy's book and book on audiotape, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac.
"What Does Your Future Hold? Listen to Dr. D. James Kennedy's book on audio tape, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac. Discover what he calls Biblical astrology or the 'Gospel in the stars.' What does the Bible tell us about the Zodiac and astrology? Startling discoveries related by eminent theologian Dr. D. James Kennedy prove that God created the Zodiac! God intended the stars to foretell the future of the world! Discover what Dr. Kennedy calls Biblical astrology, or the 'Gospel in the stars' Dr. Kennedy clearly proves from Scripture that astrology is nothing more than a satanic perversion of the original revelation of God As you listen to The Real Meaning of the Zodiac, you will gain new knowledge of God's sovereignty over all creation and gain valuable insight into a deception that is anything but harmless." (Emphasis in original.)
The guy makes lots of nebulous connections and illogical leaps. The compounding of his syllogisms got him so far off point that I was induced to write a blog post to illustrate. If you are pressed for time, you could just scroll down to the ¿Qué? section to see what I mean.
I take that back. I have seen some "On Point Preparedness" videos. When I was critical here of Judy Mikovits in Plandemic, I googled, found and I think I posted a video here from "On Point Preparedness" that also was critical of the whole new age anti-vax conspiracy marriage of the movie.
I may have seen another video by him on youtube a time or two. I sometimes surf youtube on my TV. The logo looks familiar but I have no connection or further knowledge of his ministry (if it even is a ministry).
Is your larger point that my listed connections doesn't make Trump himself a dominionist by association?
Or that his policies support all of Christianity so we can ignore his influencers, he's just using them to support HIS agenda of making America great?
Perhaps he's more like Cyrus than I envision? Cyrus was not Jewish and did not worship the God of Israel, he was nevertheless portrayed in Isaiah as an instrument of God - and "UNWITTING" conduit through which God effected His divine plan for history. God is sovereign after all --- and has allowed satan to surround Trump with false pastors and wolves --- yet, Trump prevails in spite of them, like the phoenix from ashes and his works are yet God's divine plan.
By that logic -- Obama "effected" His divine plan and you can trust God's plan will also be "effected" by Biden as well. It's why Christian's shouldn't be in so overly concerned with politics and political power and why True Christians need to abandon the "Religious Dominionist Right" in favor of filling both parties with Christians and assuring some Christian agenda is represented by BOTH parties.
Or -- maybe you have another reason for mentioning OPP???
I'm a BIG unfan of guilt by association. I want provable links, such as Trump making a statement that specifically aligns with 7MM.
But, even still, though the 7MM method is clearly a wrong-headed way to 'preach the Gospel', it is certainly better to have those who are not opposed to Judeo-Christian principles on whatever role they are in, as opposed to those who are diametrically opposed to them. And, do you really think the 7MM folks are going to achieve a theocracy?
This reminds of the notion of many Christians who refused to vote for Romney because he was a Mormon.
We elect Presidents on what we perceive of their ability to govern generally and the extent of their alignment with Judeo-Christian values. It doesn't mean we look past their shortcomings in whatever form they may be, and fair criticism is, well, fair. But, at present, for me, given a choice between Biden and Trump, the decision is a no-brainer. YMMV.
For the record, I'm registered Independent. I can't stand partisanship. I'm also well-aware that there are what are termed RINOs. Both parties are largely corrupt in the upper echelons. But there are good folks in both, too.
I only mentioned OPP because he has over 170k subscribers to his vlog, and he takes unfair swipes using poor methods, as I noted above. But people lap it up. "Orange Man Bad" because guilt by association. "Christians" can be absolute worst.
Trump is certainly NOT a dominionist himself. He's an unrepentant adultery and blaspheming heretic who would be put to death in a true theocracy. He's just made the "unwitting" mistake of surrounding himself with these dominionist and taking up their agendas believing that these heretics and the agendas/principles they espouse represent true Christianity.
And no--- a corrupt tree bears evil fruit. A secular leader is better than a hypocritical heretical blaspheming one pretending to be a Christians and making Christian appear evil.
[actually my wife came up with an example of Trumps demonstrating NAR beliefs. The whole not wearing a mask thing corresponds with a fear of signaling that he lacks faith in God to protect him. He's Cyrus after-all. )
Got Questions sums the 7MM well, calling it "dangerous" and "new age":
"The NAR and proponents of the seven mountain mandate have abandoned biblical teaching on the end times, choosing to believe that Christians must set the stage for Jesus’ second coming by achieving dominion over the world’s systems. According to 7-M theology, Jesus will only return to a world that mirrors the kingdom of God. This idea parallels the New Age teaching that anticipates a cosmic spiritual shift when man becomes a co-redeemer of Planet Earth.
Christians are called to be lights in the world (Matthew 5:14). There is no biblical requirement, however, to take the helm of all the world systems in order to usher in Christ’s kingdom. The Bible says that the world will grow worse, not better, in the last days (2 Timothy 3:1, 13; 2 Peter 3:3).
The theology associated with the seven mountain mandate is dangerous, and it sheds a terribly negative light on Christians everywhere. The 7-M teaching puts a tremendous burden on believers to perform, make progress in their relative spheres of influence, and set the stage for Jesus’ return to earth—all without a definite end point. Little emphasis is placed on the gospel message of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ; the movement is more about staking claims and taking control. The seven mountain mandate is a movement led by false prophets, and it should be avoided and exposed whenever Bible-believing Christians encounter it.
Thus, if you are a true Christian and consider yourself a part of the heretical Religious Right...repent. Otherwise, you are no different than the everyday black or white person that's out there supporting Black Lives Matter, despite the underlying horrible Marxist agenda they may or may not be aware of. You can't criticize them as a group without assessing the thoughts and beliefs of each and every individual member. This would also hold true for the Gates and Soros guilt by association conspiracy theories here as well
Do I think the 7MM groups are going to achieve a theocracy? Yes. This whole blog is predicated upon that presupposition. Dominionism parallels the New Age. The Dominionist "apostles" have already made great ecumenical strides and inroads with Roman Catholicism. Their brand of charismania is the fastest growing cult in the world and will eventually be a big enough umbrella to incorporate every independent religion as well as the new age practitioners (they already have Christian Astrology, Yoga and Tarot Cards). Eventually -- this "theocracy" will be lead by the Anti-Christ.
Well, the National Sunday Law is a very long-standing conspiracy theory I tend to think these groups will, at first, seek ecumenical reconciliation with all the denominations. Thus, I wouldn't expect a Sunday Law until AFTER the SDA refuses to enlist with the NAR.
It does appear at least one Seventh Day Adventist is raising the alarm about the NAR and dominionism/7MM. It's a pretty good analysis of the movement and even analyzes the trial run of church-state combo they have already undertaken in Uganda.
This is getting tiring. What sort of evidence do you have Gorka is a Dominionist? I don't see how that tweet supports such a notion. And the link at the bottom is a piece written by an obvious non-Christian--you can see it in his bio.
Just for the record: The possibility of overthrowing a WESTERN government (by activists of WHATEVER stripe) is NOT as far-fetched a notion as you might've believed!
Want proof?
"Harold Wilson was twice-elected Prime Minister of Great Britain and a mild social reformer. According to some sources, he was also an undercover KGB agent tasked with . . . well, no one’s actually sure...
"What’s interesting about this theory is that almost everyone believed it—and this certainly had some bizarre consequences. When a high-ranking Soviet defector claimed the Prime Minister was a Russian stooge, MI5 immediately opened a file on him. By the time 1974 rolled around, the military was so sure he was a traitor that they came within months of staging a coup d’état backed by the freakin’ Royal Family. According to the BBC and the Guardian, army brass planned to seize Heathrow, the BBC and Buckingham Palace and force the Queen to read a speech asking people to support the new military junta.
"Bear in mind that this is Britain, not some banana republic—and these guys were honestly considering the pros and cons of going full General Franco. And all to remove a Prime Minister who resigned for health reasons a few weeks later anyway.
"Retired intelligence officers gathered with military brass and plotted a coup d'etat. They would seize Heathrow airport, the BBC and Buckingham Palace. Lord Mountbatten would be the strongman, acting as interim prime minister. The Queen would read a statement urging the public to support the armed forces, because the government was no longer able to keep order.
"It sounds fantastic, almost comic. But watch Greenwood talk of setting up his own private army in 1974-75. Listen to the former intelligence officer Brian Crozier admit his lobbying of the army, how they "seriously considered the possibility of a military takeover". Watch the archive footage of troop manoeuvres at Heathrow, billed as a routine exercise but about which Wilson was never informed - and which he interpreted as a show of strength, a warning, even a rehearsal for a coup. Listen to the voice of Wilson, who five weeks after resigning summoned two BBC journalists to tell them, secretly, of the plot.
"Much of this has been known for a while; many of those involved have admitted as much and do so again in the BBC film. Yet officially it never happened: a 1987 inquiry under Margaret Thatcher concluded the allegations were false, implying that the fading Wilson had descended into paranoia. This can't be allowed to stand. Not only does it do an injustice to Wilson, it also represents an enormous cover-up. For this was the British Watergate, a conspiracy designed to pervert the democratic choice of the people."
An Asian man was confronted and harassed by Black Lives Matter protesters at an antifa riot in Portland on 13 July, 2020, after being mistaken for Andy Ngo.
Anonymous 7:58; You don't know a thing about Donald Trump's heart or mind, and you don't know anything that he's up to. You only know that you have him all judged and sentenced, just like Shiffe and Nadler, and Pelosi and the New York Times, and CNN and Schumer and the "squad". You dare to call him and unrepentant adulterer? How do you know? You don't. He might have fallen to his knees and begged The Lord to forgive him, just like David did. How do you know? You don't. Your comments and side comments such as; " This would also hold true for the Gates and Soros guilt by association conspiracy theories here as well", are indicative of a person who knows feels he or she more than everyone else. There is hubris, and error, in your conclusion that "the elect are being fooled". How the hell do you know? How do you know who is elect or being fooled? You don't. If George Soros has given hundreds of millions of dollars to "Occupy" this and that, "Me Too" and "Black Lives Matter", _ and he has most certainly done just that, then it isn't a "conspiracy theory" , it's a conspiracy! The fact that you don't have enough corage to put a name with your know-it-all comments just tells me that you have little to no faith yourself, so, thanks for the lecture, but no thanks.
Which side is the Catholic Church on, the Communist BLM/ANTIFA anarchists or the Police Departments in the United States?
According to a recent report, the answer is crystal clear; the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is financially supporting at least 8 radical Marxist groups that are working to "defund police departments" along with the "complete abolition of police departments" in the USA.
We are in the midst of a very real Communist Revolution that is seeking to destroy our nation from within. It is not at all possible that the USCCB is operating INDEPENDENTLY from Rome. Case in point; when the same USCCB attempted to change church policies regarding the crimes of clerical pedophilia, in particular, cooperating with law enforcement, the Vatican stepped in and SHUT DOWN the conference meeting. Some US Bishops expressed shock and dismay at that time, but nevertheless complied. Why? Because Rome is in total control, and what Rome says, goes.
So the bigger question is this: is Rome supporting the overthrow of the Constitutional government of the United States? That may sound like a crazy question, but not when one considers the radical support given to organizations that have a sworn commitment to destroy our current system of government.
Here Are the Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter
Ashley Rae Goldenberg June 3, 2020
Hi! This is a list of [174] of the “woke” companies that are supporting violent protests across the United States. Despite the chaos, destruction, and deaths, “woke” companies across the country have still come out in support of #BlackLivesMatter, Antifa terrorists, and general criminals.
Please consider using this list to guide in what businesses you wish to support. Please also consider using this list the next time someone makes the argument that we are living in a white supremacist country with institutionalized racism. If major companies consider supporting violent rioters and looters good for their bottom line, your cause isn’t oppressed.
[NOTE: This article was REMOVED from its original platform but thankfully is still to be found here:
P.S. "Thankfully" in that suppression of the First Amendment was sidestepped. There is, after all, racism whether there are BLM supporting companies or not. So to say "your cause is not oppressed" because these companies are doing that is overstating things. But, based on the actions by some of them, BLM's 'cause' seems to go beyond simply reducing (if not eliminating) racism, doesn't it? And of course racism can be found against people of ALL colors, not just black!
Two HUGE revelations came from that Celeste Solum article, "The Beast Is Here"...
1) You are getting 'dosed' at the time of testing.
2) "These Nano Bio Robotic weapons are used in conjunction with 5G. They were developed using fallen angel technology and witchcraft which we will see momentarily. They interface as nodes within the BEAST system and the new currency, because once it penetrates your God given barriers a person's DNA changes and becomes one with the BEAST / AI management system."
"BIOGRAPHY: Celeste Solum is an author, and former FEMA employee, who chronicles space and earth conditions that trigger the rise and fall of modern & ancient civilizations, calendars, and volatile economies. She is also a student of biblical prophecy."
THE SEVENTH DAY Revelations From The Lost Pages Of History
This five hour documentary traces the history of the Sabbath.
Hosted by award-winning actor Hal Holbrook, the series features more than fifty historians and theologians from around the world. Backed up with careful documentation, "The Seventh Day" is an authoritative presentation of the controversy over Saturday and Sunday as Christian days of worship.
I didn't check out the "SevennthDay" site, but was wondering if they covered anything regarding the Seventh Day Adventist false prophet Ellen G. White?
Keeping the Sabbath was a particular sign for the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL (verse 13, 17). Along with it being a sign, the death penalty was the punishment if any child of Israel "worked" on the Sabbath (verse 15).
If you want to chain people to the OT covenant between God and the children of Israel, you need to be consistent by including God's penalty for working on the Sabbath. You also need to enforce all of the peculiar laws of the OT that were given to the children of Israel.
(Incidentally, Sabbath "breaking" was one of the reasons that the Pharisees were so enraged against Christ. His Disciples "worked" on the Sabbath as evidenced by picking corn, while Jesus often healed on the Sabbath, which the Pharisees considered to be "work").
Numbers 15:32-36)
12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
17 it is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
23 And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.
24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?
25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?
26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?
27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
28Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!" Hebrews 4:9b-11 ABPE
"a Sabbath rest"
σαββατισμὸς (sabbatismos) Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular Strong's Greek 4520: A keeping of the Sabbath
We have seen just here by this single example alone the vital importance to...
Why are you limiting your "obedience to the law" only to the keeping of the Sabbath? If you are going to justify yourself by being obedient to the Law, you need to keep the ENTIRE Law, and that includes everything in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Exodus. The fact is, NO ONE can be justified with God by keeping the Law. The Law is a schoolmaster that leads to Christ, because it illustrates the sinful state that every person is in. The ONLY place that peace with God can be found is at the foot of the cross where Christ shed His blood.
Galatians 2:16
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."
Romans 3:20-28
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
I cannot condone her actions, because this is a case of vandalizing something city-sanctioned; but, I do like the fact that she is vocal about her cause.
"you need to be consistent by including God's penalty for working on the Sabbath.
"You also need to enforce all of the peculiar laws of the OT you need to keep the ENTIRE Law, and that includes everything in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Exodus
"you need to keep the ENTIRE Law, and that includes everything in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Exodus."
No, YOU "need" to have a FAR better understanding of what you presume to issue edicts about as evidenced by your repeatedly expressed ignorant statements on the subject.
And as far as "The fact is, NO ONE can be justified with God by keeping the Law.":
"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
The Holy Bible is NOT a book of 'works are necessary' doctrinal statement "magic spells" that you can hurl 'faith only' "counterspells" at and negate them, as you seem to think. ALL of the Bible must be used to formulate doctrine, not SOME of the Bible!
Never forget that Satan himself loves to quote (PART BUT NOT ALL of) the scriptures to "prove" his position on a given topic...
Matthew 4:5-7 NKJV
The Devil took Jesus up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written:
‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’
and,
‘In their hands they shall bear you up, Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’ ”
Jesus said to him, “It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’ ”
Craig, I didn't say or think JEsus is the same as the Father in a physical way, but that they are alike in every way but distinct persons. There is a prohibition on trying to depict The Father, but it got done two or three times anyway.
you agree with the point about honoring what a flag or other image is about, not the image itself, then I don't see the problem in honoring icons of saints or of Jesus.
God made Jesus His image, so I don't see why we can't make images of Jesus. The earliest images are kind of not that recognizeable except by designation or action, but some time after the images on the Veil of Veronica and shroud that later became known as The Shroud of Turin (C14 dates are compromised by the smoke and mending portions from a fire it survived) then certain specific points develop in art that match these.
Why is there a prohibition on making an image of the Father, but there isn’t one for the Son? Both are YHWH, right? If you argue that we haven’t seen the Father but we have seen the Son, then you cannot appeal to John 14:9: “Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Yet you did just that in your previous comment.
The issue is really quite simple. We are expressly forbidden to make ANY images of God/YHWH. Jesus is God/YHWH. Therefore, we cannot make images of Jesus. It matters not that God made Jesus in His image. God chose to do that, but that scarcely gives us the right to make our own image of this image.
And to be clear, I’m making a specific distinction between icons in a general sense as compared to images (icons) of God/YHWH, i.e., Jesus. I make no comment on the former, but I’m specifically opposed to making images of God—and Jesus is God—for this expressly violates Scripture. This is why I kept bringing up Nestorianism, a heresy of which you are fully aware. That is, you would not argue that we are allowed to make an image of a human Jesus devoid of His Divinity, for this exemplifies the Nestorian heresy; yet you also cannot assert that a Jesus image assumes both humanity and Divinity—thereby bypassing Nestorianism—because this means the icon is God, which is forbidden.
For review let’s look at the RCC Catechism:
2129 The divine injunction included the prohibition of every representation of God by the hand of man. Deuteronomy explains: "Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord [YHWH] spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure...." It is the absolutely transcendent God who revealed himself to Israel. "He is the all," but at the same time "he is greater than all his works."
The Deut reference above is 4:15-16. So, essentially it’s like this: you either accept that the icon is only human, thereby falling into Nestorianism, or you affirm the icon is Divine-human, thereby violating the First Commandment (making images of God/YHWH). There is no escaping this.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Titus 3:5-7
5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Romans 9:13-16
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
A person that has, by God's grace and mercy, become a believer in Christ will manifest works of faith which is EVIDENCE of that faith, but in no way does it merit JUSTIFICATION with God. All false religions have one thing in common, and that is this; follow their set of man made rules (that are impossible to perfectly keep) in order to gain "justification" with God, which cannot be accomplished by an man. Justification is a sovereign gift from God that cannot be earned. If you believe, even your faith is a gift, as evidenced by Ephesians 2:8, along with many other verses and passages.
You can only define the ‘Persons’ of the Trinity by their intra-Trinitarian relationships. If you delineate too sharply, you imply tritheism, which is obviously heretical. Let me quote RCC theologian Gerald O’Collins (S.J.) at length:
Here the distinction between divine and human persons (and the distinction between divine and human interrelationships) comes into sharp focus. In the case of the tripersonal God, the distinctness of interrelated persons is not constituted by separation of conscious and free subjectivities. A threefold subsistence does not entail three consciousnesses and three wills, as if the three persons, each with their own separate characteristics, constituted a kind of divine committee. One consciousness subsists in a threefold way and is shared by all three persons, albeit by each of them distinctively. It is as if God realizes the dream expressed by the saying about persons very much in love with each other: “They are of one mind and heart.” Unless we accept that all the divine essential or natural properties (like knowing, willing, and acting) are identical and shared in common by the three persons of the Trinity, it is very difficult to see how we can salvage monotheism. Each person must be seen to be identical with the divine nature or the substance [ED: homoousia] of the godhead. Otherwise, the distinction between the three persons will be upheld at the expense of the real divine oneness; the divine unity will be something recognized only after the distinct and even separate constitution of the three persons [ED: i.e., imply tritheism].
How then are the divine relationships crucial and unique? They are just that . (Here the finite model of personhood does call for adjustment.) The three divine persons are mutually distinct only in and through their relations of origin. The internal relations between the three persons form their sole distinguishing feature…[T]he (subsistent) relations account for what differentiates (and unites) the one trinitarian reality (The Tripersonal God: Understanding and Interpreting the Trinity [Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1999], p 178).
Cults always find some means of distinguishing themselves from mainline, orthodox (small o) Christianity. While SDA has a lot of truth on a variety of subjects, they remain chained to the false prophetess *Ellen G. White, along with their legalistic insistence on observing the Old Testament Sabbath mandate which was given specifically to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.
It appears that our Armstrong friend has found a home in the SDA, which isn't surprising, because Armstrong also taught the Saturday Sabbath and insisted that if a person did not observe the OT Sabbath, they could not be saved. Yet, this very same Saturday Sabbath keeper, Herbert W. Armstrong, committed incest against his very own 13 year old daughter. This evil relationship continued on for years! Not surprisingly, Armstrong also uttered countless false prophesies throughout his lifetime. False prophets and cults go hand in hand.
* Ellen G. White, aka, E. G. White, was a prolific writer that often delved into making prophetic statements, most of which proved to be completely false. Even so, her writings are considered to be on a par with Holy Scripture by many SDA adherents. There is a faction of the SDA that does not hold to this view, but, at the same time, they do not reject E. G. White as a "false prophetess," while maintaining that there is great value to be gained by studying her writings. If you follow ANY SDA teachings, you will soon see and hear references to the name "E. G. White." In other words, E. G. White and SDA cannot be separated.
This guy, Angel Quiroz, gets it! He's well-spoke and well-acquainted with the associated issues, and how "social justice" and Cultural Marxism have infiltrated the 'church':
After getting such great feedback on my Why I Left The Left video, I decided to talk a bit about the way Leftism has been infiltrating the Christian Church. As a believing Christian who is plugged into my church community, I have seen first hand how the lies of BLM and other lefist organization have poisoned the well of critical thinking. Let me know what I should talk about next!
IGNORE/SIDESTEP that which you can't DIRECTLY rebut...
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!" Hebrews 4:9b-11 ABPE
"a Sabbath rest"
σαββατισμὸς (sabbatismos) Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular Strong's Greek 4520: A keeping of the Sabbath
"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
"The saints...are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus."
I apologize for the great length of this (and this will conclude my responses to the topic) but although I wouldn't normally respond thus to an intellectually dishonest debater (waste of time) there are undoubtedly others who are now legitimately interested in the answer.
So be it.
Which Old Testament LAWS should we keep today?
The basic principles explaining which laws are still in force. Here is how you can know which laws in the Old Testament were changed or abolished, and which we are commanded to observe today!
“How can I know the difference between the added ceremonial laws and the spiritual laws which we are to observe today?”
This question is absolutely BASIC.
Everyone of you needs to understand in detail the answer to this question. Your Christian growth-your very character- depends on your knowledge of this question.
The entire Bible was written to illustrate the lives of individuals who have kept the spiritual laws God set in motion. We need to study their example.
New Testament Teaching
Notice, first of all, the New Testament teaching.
Jesus-the living Head of our Church ---told the disciples: “Whoso therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoso shall Do and TEACH them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5 : 19).
How important it is that we-the disciples of Jesus today-become familiar with the least commandments-that we live by every word of God.
Bible Is Final AUTHORITY
True Christianity differs from all other 'versions' in that it takes the Bible as ABSOLUTE and FINAL AUTHORITY.
No one can gain entrance into God’s Kingdom unless that individual first recognizes the authority and rule of God.
We are not to argue with God or use human reason to evade the plain commands of Scripture. God is Supreme Lawgiver. He knows what is best for us. He has perfect wisdom and understanding. We can place our confidence in Him and rely on His judgment which He committed to writing for us-in the Bible.
The tendency is to use human reason to side-step what seems of lesser importance to us. It is so very easy for us to say: “I don’t see why God would want us to keep this. It seems so impractical in this modern age. Now here is the way I see it.”
This attitude is exactly what makes other churches carnal and worldly-of the devil. They use their human reason instead of accepting the BIBLE as FINAL AUTHORITY.
Some of you have been negligent in your study of God’s laws. You have forgotten the admonition: “Lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul. . . . And ye shall teach them [to] your children, talking of them, when you sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up” (Deut. 11: 18-19).
This is for us today!
So let us all open our minds and come to a new understanding of pure, true Christianity.
Ten Commandments Binding at Creation
Christians should recognize the eternal binding authority of the Ten Commandments. David was inspired to say: “All His commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness” (Ps. 110:7-8). Jesus didn’t abolish the Ten Commandments. “Think not,” He said, “that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill.” (i.e. to EXEMPLIFY!)
We must follow His example today and fulfill the law. We must believe the prophets, too-and obey God as they commanded us.
The Ten Commandments constitute the basic spiritual law which regulates human life. It is “holy, just and good,” said Paul in Romans 7: 12 and 14.
First, remember that God’s basic spiritual laws existed from the beginning. When speaking of divorce, Jesus said that “from the beginning it was not so” (Matt. 19: 8). It was a sin at the beginning of this present creation to commit adultery!
The world strayed so far from the truth that, by the days of Moses, God had to reveal His law anew to the Israelites. Israel had lost a knowledge of God’s ways while in Egyptian bondage. Let us notice, however, that God was merely revealing the laws which were already in force. The old covenant did not establish the spiritual laws.
In Exodus 16:28 we read that the Eternal, when speaking about Israel to Moses, said: “How long do you refuse to keep my commandments and my laws?”
Israel could not refuse what did not exist! Now turn to Exodus 18:16. Moses told his father-in-law that when the people have a dispute, “I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.”
Other Laws Based on Ten Commandments
Notice! Here are the statutes and laws of God existing BEFORE the old covenant. As they existed before the old covenant, they could not be abolished when it ceased to exist. The old covenant could not destroy what it did not bring into force. The old covenant was merely an AGREEMENT to keep these laws which were already in force!
Notice how the statutes and laws of God magnify the Ten Commandments: God forbids us to eat unclean meats. To lust after what He forbids is to covet. One of the Ten Commandments says: “Thou shalt NOT covet.”
Notice also that God’s law made provision for judgments to be established over the centuries. (See Numbers 27: 11 for example.) The judgments are binding decisions based on God’s previously revealed law.
But when did the carnal ceremonies and sacrifices of the Levitical priesthood begin? And how can we distinguish them from the statutes and laws that existed prior to the old covenant?
When Did Sacrificial Laws Begin?
When God brought Israel to the foot of Mt. Sinai, He gave the Ten Commandments to them. He allowed Moses to declare all the statutes and judgments to Israel (Exodus, chapters 20-24). These statutes and judgments MAGNIFY the Ten Commandments.
Now notice carefully. There is only one sacrifice mentioned in the book of the law-the passover sacrifice (Exodus 23 : 18). God called it “MY sacrifice.” Next, turn to Jeremiah 7:22-23. Listen to what the Eternal inspired Jeremiah to write: “For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I DID NOT SPEAK . . . OR COMMAND them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this COMMAND I GAVE THEM: ‘Obey my voice . . . and walk in ALL THAT WAY THAT I COMMAND YOU, that it may be well with you.’ ”
God did not command these sacrifices to be offered originally. This explains why none of those temporary sacrifices were perpetuated by different symbols in the New Testament Church. ONLY THE SYMBOLS TODAY-because it began before the old covenant was made. (See its institution in Exodus 12 before the Israelites left Egypt.)
The very fact that Jesus substituted unleavened bread and wine for the passover lamb only, and not for the temporary offerings, is absolute proof that the ceremonial old testament offerings are not binding today!-but that the passover is binding! Paul says (Gal. 3: 19) these temporary rituals and sacrifices were “added because of transgression” -because God’s spiritual law was being broken-until Christ should come. They foreshadowed the sacrifices of Christ and were a “reminder of sin” to teach thc people the need of the Messiah who would pay the penalty of human transgression (Hebrews 10:3).
Notice that these temporary laws did not define sin. They were reminders of sin. God’s spiritual laws define sin. The laws which define sin-which explain what sin is-these laws we are to keep today.
Sacrifices FOREVER?
Consider for a moment the New Testament instructions about sacrifices.
Today we have spiritual offerings and sacrifices: “Ye . . . are being built unto a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ,” wrote Peter. (See I Peter 2:5 and 9.) We are to “present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, well-pleasing to God, your spiritual service” (Romans 12:1).
It is a spiritual principle to offer oneself in living obedience-to sacrifice the self-to God. God Almighty is worthy to receive such service from us.
The principle of offering sacrifices existed before Moses. Christ volunteered to offer Himself from the beginning to pay for the sins of mankind. In the period from Moses to Christ the practice of giving offerings was reduced to a physical plane. The children of Israel were a physical, carnal people without the promise of the Holy Spirit. They could not offer themselves in spiritual obedience to God (Deut. 29:4), so they performed ritualistic washings and offered animals and other physical types instead.
They also needed to be reminded of Jesus’ sacrifice, so God gave them physical types in the “law of Moses,” “until the seed should come.” But remember, the spiritual sacrifices of which those in the law of Moses were merely temporary types-are still to be offered up by us today!
“But,” many ask, “weren’t the Levitical sacrifices ordained forever?” Yes, the Bible does say that the Levitical priesthood and its sacrifices were to be perpetual or forever. But let us understand the real significance of the Hebrew word translated “forever.” It means continuous, so long as the factors involved exist.
Notice three scriptures where this meaning is made plain. Men could be the slaves of a master forever-meaning till the death of one of the parties. (See Exodus 21:6; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17.)
What are the factors which may limit the offering of sacrifices? One, the need of a physical, human priesthood. Two, the need for sacrifices.
Now consider the following:
What is the purpose of a priesthood? To offer sacrifices and to act on behalf of men in relation to God (Hebrews 5:1 and 8:3). But how long do offerings as reminders of sin need to be made? Paul tells us: “Now where remission of [sins) is, there is no more offering for sin” (Hebrews 10: 18).
To offer sacrifices as reminders of sins already paid for by Jesus, who gave His life in full payment for all sins, is needless. Moreover, SINCE THE HOLY SPIRIT HAS ALSO BEEN MADE AVAILABLE, PHYSICAL OFFERINGS AND VARIOUS WASHINGS WHICH ARE TYPES OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ARE NO LONGER NEEDED. HENCE THE PHYSICAL LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD IS NO LONGER NECESSARY- the old testament washings and offerings are no longer binding. The factors involved in the law of Moses ceased to exist.
God ALONE Changes Laws
Perhaps we have failed to realize that God ALONE has the right to add and change or alter carnal or fleshly laws.
The carnal laws were subject to change because they were only types of the promised seed, Christ, who should take upon Himself the sins of the world. When the circumstances were altered, the obligation to practice the carnal laws ceased.
But what about the spiritual laws?
GOD WILL NOT ALTER HIS SPIRITUAL LAWS. The spiritual laws describe the very character of God. They enable us to know what God is like. Since the character of God remains unchanging-“I change not, saith the Eternal” (Mal. 3:6 ) and “Jesus, the same yesterday, today, and forever” ( Heb. 13 : 8) -the spiritual laws could not change.
Now let us notice where we can find exactly what constituted the temporary laws. Turn with me to Hebrews 9:9-10.
In these two verses we read of the material gifts and sacrifices which included “ONLY meats and drinks and diverse washings -carnal ordinances, imposed until the time of reformation.”
Notice that the temporary laws did not pertain to murder or theft or sabbath- breaking, but were ONLY those ordinances regulating meat and drink offerings and different washings or ablutions of the unclean. These external washings were a type of the Holy Spirit cleaning us up within.
ANY OTHER LAWS NOT INCLUDED IN HEBREWS 9:10 WERE NOT PART OF THE RITUALS ADDED BECAUSE OF SIN!
Remember this point!
It will help you to know which rites in the old testament were added to the statutes and judgments already in existence.
What Is the Law of Moses?
Some people are easily confused by the trick statement that the Ten Commandments are the law of Moses. They turn to Luke 2:22-24 in which the ceremonies of the “law of Moses” are also called part of the “law of the Lord.”
Why is the “law of Moses” also called the “law of the Lord”?
Because all law comes from God! Moses is not the lawmaker! He merely told the people the laws that God set in motion (John 1: 17).
The law of Moses is NEVER called the Ten Commandments. It comprises only statutes and judgments which God gave him to communicate to the people. The difference between the law of Moses and the Ten Commandments is that God spoke the ten words, but Moses delivered the statutes and judgments.
Now, let us recall that when Moses first delivered the statutes and judgments, the law of Moses had no sacrifices connected with it. Jeremiah said so! (Jer. 7:22).
The law of Moses was originally the civil law, based on the principles of the Ten Commandments. These civil statutes and judgments are right and good (Psalm 119:7,8).
But after the close of the old covenant (Ex. 24) , the Levitical priesthood was established and the laws regulating offerings were added (Exodus 28: 1 ). (Prior to this time offerings were voluntary and young men were priests-Exodus 24: 5.)
Therefore the law of Moses has more than one part! Notice God’s definition of the original part of that law in Malachi 4:4: “Remember the law of my servant Moses, the statutes and judgments that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel.”
BUT ADDED TO THIS LAW LATER WERE OTHER STATUTES REGULATING MATERIAL RITUALS, SUCH AS SACRIFICES, CENSE, AND VARIOUS WASHINGS FOR THE UNCLEAN.
This almost unnoticed fact is what causes so much difficulty in understanding that the LAW OF MOSES WAS COMPOSED OF two DISTINCT PARTS: THE CIVIL AND THE RITUALISTIC!
Part of Law of Moses Still in Force!
Jesus said the two great commandments were love to God and love to neighbor. Do you know from where He quoted these laws?
Out of the book of the law!-the laws that Moses spoke to the people. Read it in Leviticus 19:18: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” And Deuteronomy 6.4. “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.”
In II John 5 and 6, God commands Christians to obey these two basic laws which He communicated to the people by Moses! In I1 Kings 23:25, Josiah is praised because he “turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MOSES!
Notice how plain it is. The civil law of Moses expounds the Ten Commandments by revealing how the ten basic principles are to be applied. We are to keep this part of the law, not in the strictness of the letter, but according to its spirit and intent.
Added Part NO LONGER in Force
Then why do we read in Acts that Gentile converts do not have to observe the “law of Moses,” except for four points? (Acts 15.) The answer is made plain in Acts 21:21.
The laws of Moses called in question involved “customs.” Read it for yourself. The Jews were falsely accusing Paul, saying that he taught Jews living abroad “not to circumcise their children or observe the CUSTOMS!” (Acts 21:21.)
The controversy in the early Church did not involve the civil law of Moses. It involved only the ceremonial additions to the original civil law of Moses -only customs-ADDED ceremonies or rituals.
This is further proven by noticing the four points, included in the law added by Moses, which are binding on all Christians everywhere. We are not to eat blood, animals which are strangled, meats offered to idols or to practice fornication. These four points were originally part of the civil law of Moses.
They were also included later with the added ceremonies to regulate the typical sacrifices. The Gentiles ate their sacrifices with the blood, often strangled their animals, and presented them to idols. They also committed fornication in their religious ceremonies. To prevent these pagan customs being practised by Israel, God included the four civil laws along with the rituals. (See Lev. 17:7 and 10; Numbers 2 5 : 1- 3 .)
When the ceremonies were declared no longer binding (in Acts 15), these four points had to be declared binding because some would have thought they were abolished along with the temporary rituals. But since these four points were part of the civil law before the addition of the rituals, they remained binding after the abolition of the physical sacrifices and washings!
How plain! Only the ceremonial customs of the law of Moses have passed away.
The civil law of Moses which defined sin was not called in question, was not involved.
The many civil laws regulating tithing, clean and unclean meats, the annual sabbaths, and many others are still for the New Testament Church because they explain what sin is. They were not part of the ceremonial law of Moses mentioned in Hebrews 9:10 and abolished in Acts 15. The civil principles of the law of Moses were a separate law and not part of the added “law of Moses” which is no longer in force.
Ministration of Death
Now let us consider the use of the death penalty in old testament times.
A common question often asked is this: Why do we not enforce the death penalty for sabbath-breakers or for any other violation of the Ten Commandments?
The answer to this question is found in Matthew 5. Let us turn to this important chapter again. Jesus was anticipating doubts in the minds of the disciples. He commences by saying He came to keep the law, not to destroy it. Then He proceeds to CHANGE the APPLICATION of the civil laws as they were given to ancient Israel. He magnifies them and makes them honorable. He raises them from narrow, national laws -given to a carnal nation to be administered according to the strict letter to a spiritual plane regulating the whole of human society. Six times Jesus says: “You have heard it said in olden times. . . But I say to you. . . .” and He then proceeds to expound the spiritual principles underlying the civil laws of Moses.
In particular, notice Matthew 5 : 38; “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. . . .”
Civil Law Restored to Perfection
Jesus RESTORED THESE SPIRITUAL LAWS as they were from the beginning. But why was Moses commanded to give them only in the letter to ancient Israel?
Ancient Israel was not like the Church today. It was a national church--a carnal nation organized into the congregation of Israel. They did not have the promise of the Holy Spirit; they were a nation of this world. Moses said that they did not even have the power or strength of will to keep what little he commanded them (Deut. 5:29).
And neither do human beings today! People don’t want to obey the commandments. “The carnal mind is enmity against God: fur it is not subject to the law of God’ (Rom. 8:7). Israel needed punishments for lawbreakers to keep peace and security in the land. Therefore God allowed human judges to take His divine prerogatives and to execute punishments on their fellow men.
Jesus gave the civil law to Moses in the strict letter at Mount Sinai for a physical church. Fifteen centuries later Jesus restored the spirit of the law for the spiritual Church.
Jesus came to make it possible for us to be forgiven and to have the very nature of God acting in us. Therefore He restored the civil law to its original spiritual perfection.
So to conclude...
It behooves each of us, individually, to reconcile our beliefs and practices with the Bible as best we can because:
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!” (1 John 2:3-4).
At least make an attempt to be honest. YOU did not write the above posts. YOU copied and pasted the material and didn't give credit to the original writer.
My suspicion is that you copied and pasted directly from a UCG (Armstrong) writer. Why do I say that? Because it follows the typical Armstrong view on obedience to the OT Law.
Post the link from which you copied and pasted this Armstrong propaganda from.
PS: When I have time, I'll be posting details about the origins, beliefs and practices of SDA, along with revealing information on E. G. White, SDA's False Prophet.
Of course I didn't write (most) of it, Sherlock. I had (& have) NO intention of indulging you in your little game of "Can't Rebut The Article? Attack The Author!" Find someone else to play Ad Hominem with.
(Notice folks: RayB DIDN'T EVEN TRY to rebut the ARTICLE itself! That should tell you all you need to know.)
RayB, you’re doing a good job, but like you said, there’s no reason to expect an answer out of this.
The question is simple Anon, you refuse to give a straight simple answer.
You say we need to study and follow the entire law, the 613 mitzvot I assume you mean.
Do you follow them all? It was nearly impossible in the OT days, and is impossible now. Which is why Jesus’s sacrifice freed us from it, he fulfilled the debt.
If you want to continue dodging this simple question, it’s ok, I already know you don’t follow them all. I’ve had to deal with Messianic Jew/Hebrew Roots people who talk the same game. What traditional Christians would like is for people like you to make sense and to stop lying.
Well folks, looks like I really touched a nerve, doesn't it? Haha! First RayB asks me for my response TWICE, 2nd time ending with "why don't you provide a definitive answer??" And when I GIVE him an EXTREMELY definitive answer he flips out, demanding to know just WHO the article's author is (so, of course, that he can at LEAST launch an Ad Hominem attack).
Then this 'Reuben G.' character suddenly pops up out of nowhere, claiming that I said that we need to study and follow the entire law when that was what RAYB SAID IN HIS 'EDICT'! And has the incredible Chutzpah to say that I avoided RayB's question. And BOTH Ray AND Reuben attacked my integrity! Dear me! LOL!
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SIMPLY NOTICE HOW NEITHER ONE OF THEM ADDRESSES THE CRYSTAL CLEAR QUOTES OF THE BIBLE STATING IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT WORKS ARE NECESSARY AND THAT THE SABBATH IS STILL TO BE OBSERVED. ALL THEY DO INSTEAD IS DISTRACT, DISTRACT, DISTRACT FROM THOSE DEADLY-TO-THEIR-CAUSE BIBLE VERSES!
Federal Judge Esther Salas--the first Latina to sit on this bench--just had her home 'hit' by a man posing as a FedEx deliveryman. She wasn't not there at the time, but the imposter shot and killed killed her son who had opened the door, and shot her husband multiple times. Her husband is in critical condition, though still alive.
Here's the important part: U.S. District Judge Esther Salas is presiding over the Deutsche Bank/Jeffrey Epstein civil case after it was assigned to her 4 days ago.
New Jersey Federal Judge Esther Salas, whose son and husband were shot on July 19 in their home, was recently assigned to a case linked to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Bloomberg reported on July 16 that Deutsche Bank AG is accused of misleading investors “about anti-money-laundering deficiencies” as well as failing to “properly monitor” customers that are “high-risk,” including Epstein.
Isn't it amazing that a very lengthy series of posts defacto inherently EXPLAINING "THAT I don't and WHY I don't keep the entire Old Testament laws and HOW I'm able to arrive at which Laws to accept or reject." let alone my clear answer explaining why I didn't mention the article's author are TOTALLY IGNORED!
Simple question that Anonymous Armstrong refuses to answer:
WHO is the the AUTHOR of your copy & paste posts?
Why won't he give us the name of the author along with a link to the article? Because it comes straight from the Armstrong cult, that's why.
If nothing else, this serves as an educational illustration as to how members of cults operate; they want to rope you in and enslave you into their cult by using lies and deceit.
Check out the info in this vlog, substituting "planned" for "predicted", and you can see one guy's views--supported by a book--on how/why things are going the way they are presently:
As I said: I had (& have) NO intention of indulging RayB in his little game of "Can't Rebut The Article? Attack The Author!" HE can find someone else to play Ad Hominem with.
(Notice folks: RayB STILL DIDN'T EVEN TRY to rebut the ARTICLE itself! That ALONE should tell you all you need to know.)
AND FOR GOOD MEASURE NOTICE HOW NONE OF THEM ADDRESSES THE CRYSTAL CLEAR QUOTES OF THE BIBLE STATING IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT WORKS ARE NECESSARY AND THAT THE SABBATH IS STILL TO BE OBSERVED. ALL THEY CAN DO INSTEAD IS DISTRACT, DISTRACT, DISTRACT FROM THOSE DEADLY-TO-THEIR-CAUSE BIBLE VERSES!
BUT now to the HILARIOUS part:
RayB stated "Why won't he give us the name of the author along with a link to the article? Because it comes straight from the Armstrong cult, that's why.
"If nothing else, this serves as an educational illustration as to how members of cults operate; they want to rope you in and enslave you into their cult"
Only ONE PROBLEM with THAT BRILLIANT ANALYSIS:
IT'D BE REALLY HARD TO, UH, 'ROPE YOU IN' AND 'ENSLAVE' YOU...(i.e. get a far better understanding of Biblical topics in general than RayB offers)...
IF YOU WERE NEVER TOLD WHERE TO GO TO GET MORE INFORMATION!
Motorcycle accidents ruled Covid deaths? In the rush to paint Florida as the epicenter of the “second wave” of the coronavirus outbreak, government officials and their allies in the mainstream media have stooped to ridiculous depths to maximize the death count. A television station this weekend looked into two highly unusual Covid deaths among victims in their 20s, and when they asked about co-morbidities they were told one victim had none, because his Covid death came in the form of a fatal motorcycle accident.
Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. In fact the “spike” that has dominated the mainstream for the last couple of weeks is full of examples of such trickery.
Washington state last week revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed that anyone who passed away for any reason whatsoever who also had coronavirus was listed as a “Covid-19 death” even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19.
Thanks to anonymous for the entire full length book posted in the comments section of Constance's blog. I didn't read one word of it... Okay I read a couple paragraphs and then I realized that it was an entire thesis, cut and pasted here. I understand that it was some kind of rebuttal to something that Ray B said, or something like that? If you want people to read a book that you like, why not just recommend it to everyone? Did you win the argument? I don't care. Did anyone actually read that ?
Dr. Mark Sircus, in an article published on Lew Rockwell, July 10, 2020 titled: Wearing Masks-A Sledgehammer to Health reveals a startling statistic. He notes that typical CO2 in the air is about 400 ppm, a little higher than that around the nose or mouth as we breathe. But a typical mask can drive the level up to a dangerous 5,000 ppm!
According to Dr. Sircus the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has determined that the minimum oxygen concentration in the air we breathe should be no less than 19.5 percent. Most of what we breathe in the atmosphere at sea level is nitrogen gas, approximately 78 percent.
But wearing a face mask has been shown to reduce the amount of oxygen in the blood stream to 17.5 percent which over time can lead to hypoxia or lack of adequate oxygen to function normally. Headaches, foggy thinking and lethargy are common byproducts. Mask wearing while engaging in heightened physical activity can make matters even worse.
New from Millennial Millie. But wait, Chris Wallace read the entire document and didn't find anything about "defund the police". That's because he didn't know the lingo:
No one is responding to any “answers” in the cut and paste article because no one read it! Say your answer concisely in your own words.
2 simple questions still stand unanswered.
Remember, in the Didache it was written:
But every Lord's day [kata kuriak·n de kuriou] gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations. (Didache, chap. 14)
Those people were around just a few years before Armstrong, the Adventists, and all the other kooks.
Acts of the Apostles 20:7 says:
And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow: and he continued his speech until midnight.
When they say gathered to break bread, he ain’t talkin about a party with hummus and pitas.
Just a few tidbits of information that I was able to gather from a variety of sources:
Armstrongism, Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventism, all have their roots firmly planted in the same soil of the heretical sect known as "Millerism," a religious movement founded by a heretical preacher in the 19th. Century by the name of William Miller. Consistent with the spirit of the day, Miller concentrated much of his studies focused upon end times prophesies. A farmer by trade and part-time "Baptist" preacher, Miller took it upon himself to study, and interpret, the meaning of Daniel Chapter 8. Miller claimed to have received a "revelation" of the EXACT date of Christ's return to earth; October 22, 1844. Miller also developed an number of other heretical doctrines which survive to this day. Among Miller's vast number of followers were James & Ellen G. White. Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Jehovah Witnesses and another failed "date setter," was also heavily influenced by the teachings of William Miller.
Miller's followers (just as false "date setter" Harold Camping's followers) gave away their "earthly belongings" and anxiously waited for the 2nd. Coming. When the event did not occur (known as "The Great Disappointment"), many left the movement and splintered into other groups that were formed. James & E. G. White temporarily remained and attempted to explain that the "date was correct, but the 'event' was misinterpreted." Ellen White developed the theory that on the 1844 date, Christ "entered into the Holy of Holies in order to further work upon the cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary." Ellen White also proclaimed that the 10/22/1844 date signified the "closing of redemption," meaning that no one could be saved after that date. The Whites eventually founded the Seventh Day Adventist movement and held to this heresy until it was quietly rejected in 1851.
Ellen White considered herself a prophet that had visions from God and visitations from angels, from which she was able to provide "truth to her little flock." White was a prolific writer (her husband owned a publishing company) and authored "at least 16 books," with her earliest appearing in print 1844, in which she enumerated a number of prophesies, virtually all of which failed. In 1882, recognizing this problem, SDA moved to redact her failed prophesies from reprints, while falsely proclaiming that these reprinted publications were FIRST EDITIONS.
E. G. White's teachings, still followed by SDA today, contained numerous heresies. Here are just a few; White proclaimed that "when a person dies, they no longer exist," that "Hell is not eternal," that "there is no such thing as eternal security," that "keeping the OT Saturday Sabbath was God's GREATEST COMMANDMENT and was paramount to one's salvation," that "Jesus was a created being who was manifested as Michael the Archangel," and (among others) that "Satan would bear our sins."
Ellen White was also apparently a "holy fashion designer." In 1867, she came up with the design of a hideous black dress that was "shorter" than the custom of the day and also made women look ridiculously fat. She claimed that she received her design via a vision from "god." She claimed that women and girls that did not adhere to her "dress doctrine" risked losing their salvation." White fanatically held to this unpopular "vision from god" for eight years, and then suddenly ended her soul-threatening doctrine.
To this day, Seventh Day Adventist doctrine, while claiming to "believe in the Trinity," also claim that Jesus was Michael the Archangel, making Him a created being. (Jehovah Witnesses, while denying the Trinity, also claim that Jesus was Michael the Archangel. Armstrongism denies the Trinity, claiming that the Holy Spirit is not a member of the Trinity, but only a "spirit.)
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." 1 John 5:7
Was Jesus EVER Michael the Archangel?
Hebrews Chapter 1:
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6 And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
NOTE: Verse 8 is a fulfillment of the prophecy that names Christ God from Psalms 45:6, which reads "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre." When Jehovah Witnesses knock on your door, ask them to interpret this verse ... then take them to the Hebrews 1:8 verse which clearly declares Jesus as the "O God" in Psalms 45:8. Will that convince them? No. But at least it might plant a seed ! I always encourage them to read the Bible on their own, without notes or comments (they typically claim they do, but are under disciplinary penalty from their hierarchy if found to be doing so).
No, no, no... Jesus was NEVER Michael the Archangel. How can anyone with a brain even think such a thing??? That sounds like some new age 'mumbo jumbo' attempting to diminish the divinity of Jesus... and His role as Savior of the world. Comments such as these should be highly offensive to every Christian.
Craig, we are forbidden to make an image of The Father apparently or to make images that we worship as things in themselves as distinct from relative veneration of God or saints they represent, GOD HAS MADE HIS OWN IMAGE WHICH IS JESUS and we can make images of that image.
THE USE OF ICONS OF CHRIST IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE INCARNATION, OF THE GOODNESS OF THE PHYSICAL CREATION, ITS EVENTUAL RESTORATION TO GOODNESS FROM FALLENNESS.
as for sabbath keeping, Colossians chapter 2 discusses all this as precursors to Jesus pointing to Him, but now the reality has come, THEREFORE vs. 1`6 is against keepng the mosaic indicator specifics the sabbath included and not let ourselves be judged for not doing so.
An early council cited in a post discussed those who chose to keep the sabbath and did so on Saturday and judaizing risks reverting to judaism so even the two fast days a week were changed to Wednesday and Friday mourning the conspiracy against Christ and the suffering He underwent for us. Sunday is not the sabbath true but was recommended to be treated as such by those intent on keeping the sabbath.
Constantine had declared Sunday first half work free to make it easier for Christians in military and civil service to attend Holy Liturgy. This, according to one source, was actually before his conversion, because likely of his mother being a Christian already.
Theophanies in the OT were preincarnate Jesus Christ, sometimes the angel of God in such situations is Jesus, other times angels that are creatures not JEsus are what appeared. Jesus is not Michael the archangel, whose name means Who is Like God, which might be better understood as a question answer to which is, none, instead of a descriptor which would be interpretable as him being preincarnate Jesus disguised.
As regards when to keep the Sabbath, the NT—and even the Didachē—do not necessarily support Sunday “Sabbath”. There are a number of issues, but I’ll try to be brief. [Technical info is in brackets.]
Beginning with the Didachē, I have to admit I was taken aback by the transliterated Greek Rueben G. provided. Basically, it’s redundant, and doesn’t even have the word “day” in it! This led me to investigate for myself. My transliteration of the text below is just a bit different, though essentially the same [preferring “y” for the upsilon instead of “u” {reserving “u” to designate genitive}, and I’ve added an “n” {Greek nu}, which is found in Holmes’ version—these are not infrequently omitted]:
kata kyriakēn de kyriou
First, the de (but) is never placed first in any sentence, so it is, accordingly, after the accusative phrase kata kyriakēn. The kyriou is a genitive of kyrios (“Lord”) further describing/limiting the accusative. kyriakē(n) is the accusative form of kyriakos, which is an adjective meaning “pertaining to the Lord”. Thus, taking this word-for-word we have:
Because of this, the Georgian text tradition has the much more logically phrased: kath ēmeran kyriou = according to {the} day of(-the)-Lord. [The final “a” in “kata” is elided and the “t” is expanded to “th” (thēta) because the next word begins with a vowel.]
The word kyriokos is only found twice in the entire NT: in Revelation 1:10 (en tē̗ kyriakē̗ ēmera̗ = on the Lord’s Day) and 1Cor 11:20 (kyriakon deipnon = Lord’s Supper). On the Revelation passage, it is almost universally recognized as referring to Sunday—aka, Resurrection Day. But, that does not necessarily indicate the Sabbath was switched from Saturday to Sunday (Resurrection Day). On the Corinthians passage, the day on which the Lord’s Supper was/is to be held is not mentioned.
In Acts 20:7, they clearly met and “broke bread” on a particular Sunday. But that does not necessarily mean they were doing the “Lord’s Supper (kyriakos deipnos, or deipnos kyriakou), nor does it necessarily mean they were practicing a new weekly ritual understood to be on Sunday as opposed to Saturday. In fact, in Acts 2:46 they habitually “broke bread” in people’s houses, making no distinction regarding which day(s). On the other hand, Acts 2:1 indicates they were all together on the Day of Pentecost (Sunday), and one could possibly construe that Acts 2:42 is from that same day (“They continually devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching, and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.”). Yet again, this, to me, is much better seen as a new section, making a general statement, which makes better sense given the intervening context between this and 2:46.
The reference to breaking bread appears only twice in the NT, here and in Luke 24:35, where it refers merely to table fellowship [generally]. It is unclear here whether the phrase refers to the Lord’s Supper (so NLT) or is a reference to taking some meals together, of which the Lord’s Supper was a part. The verb κλάω (klaō, break) appears in Acts 2:46; 20:7, 11; and 27:35. In 2:46, the reference seems to be used broadly of meals, suggesting a broad use here [in 2:42] as well, although 20:7 appears to refer to the [Lord’s] table on the first day of the week. What makes the choice hard to decide is that the Lord’s table was part of a larger meal in the earliest church…Most of the references in this context seem broad, which would suggest a broad reference here [in 2:42]…Either way, the phrase suggests intimate interaction and mutual acceptance that was a part of community life (pp 150-51).
In any case, Got Questions has a few articles on and surrounding this: https://www.gotquestions.org/Saturday-Sunday.html
Myself, for a while I was attending a Saturday evening service—the “church” had services both days. And it wasn’t a Hebrew Roots, SDA, etc. It was an ‘evangelical’-type non-denominational “church”.
And one can even argue that NT Christians are not required to keep a “Sabbath” per se. But, that’s a whole different subject (and I see just now Christine mentioned it).
From the link you provided (and the 7th “ecumenical” council is not recognized by “Protestants”, so it is hardly “ecumenical”):
Icons are necessary and essential because they protect the full and proper doctrine of the Incarnation. While God cannot be represented in His eternal nature ("...no man has seen God", John 1:18), He can be depicted simply because He "became human and took flesh." Of Him who took a material body, material images can be made. In so taking a material body, God proved that matter can be redeemed. He deified matter, making it spirit-bearing, and so if flesh can be a medium for the Spirit, so can wood or paint, although in a different fashion.
The last part makes me think of the tikkun of Kabbalism (“God proved that matter can be redeemed. He deified matter…”), and the Gnostic and Kabbalistic notion of panentheism in general, as well as A. A. Bailey’s book The Consciousness of the Atom (and etc.).
I sure don’t need an icon of Jesus in order to adhere to “the full and proper doctrine of the Incarnation”. Scripture makes it clear enough, doesn’t it? This is man’s attempted justification for something clearly forbidden in Scripture.
Your claim—and the claim of the 7th council—is just not Scriptural in this aspect. How do we split the Trinity in such a fashion as to imply tritheism? That is, if the Father is YHWH and the Son is YHWH (see Jude 1:5, e.g.), why is the Father not permitted to be made into an icon while the Son is? What Scripture makes this distinction, providing this allowance?
You wrote: Theophanies in the OT were preincarnate Jesus Christ, sometimes the angel of God in such situations is Jesus, other times angels that are creatures not JEsus are what appeared…
EXACTLY! I was hoping you’d go down this route so that I could show you the fallacy of this whole thing. And Who is the One in the theophany of Deut 4:15-16 (as referenced in the RCC Catechism 2129)? It’s YHWH! And, given your position that theophanies were of the pre-incarnate Christ (I don’t disagree), then HOW CAN WE MAKE IMAGES OF THE INCARNATE CHRIST/YHWH? It’s a non sequitur to conclude that we are permitted to make icons of Jesus because God/YHWH made an image of Himself in the Person of Christ: Again, God did, but this scarcely gives us the right, for that would violate the First Commandment.
You are adhering to man’s tradition—at the expense of Scriptural mandate.
I will not be responding to "Reuben G." You can see his attitude. Let alone that he uses the Didache as if it were in the Bible (it's NOT) to top it off (and this is a real winner) he TOTALLY DISREGARDS "any 'answers' in the cut and paste article".
WHY?
HERE IS HIS BRILLIANT, FAIR & SCHOLARLY REASON (LOL):
"because no one read it!"
And as far as RayB, again you just need to do no more than simply look at how he CONTINUES to DISTRACT, DISTRACT & DISTRACT from:
The BIBLE PASSAGES WHICH STATE IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS...
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own [which was, of course, on the SEVENTH day]. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!"
"You see then that a man IS justified by works, and NOT by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!” (1 John 2:3-4).
"The saints...are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus."
Rev. 14:12 NKJV
~A COMPARISON~
Jesus And The Apostles (JATA)
#1) JATA: KEPT The Commandments #2) JATA: KEPT the 7th Day Sabbath #3) JATA: KEPT The Annual Holy Days - Passover, Days Of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Feast Of Trumpets, Day Of Atonement, Feast Of Tabernacles, The Last Great Day. #4) JATA: Had Baptism By Immersion #5) JATA: Laying On Of Hands #6) JATA: KEPT God's Food Laws #7) JATA: Etc.
Church Of God (COG)
#1) COG: KEEPS The Commandments #2) COG: KEEPS the 7th Day Sabbath #3) COG: KEEPS The Annual Holy Days - Passover, Days Of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Feast Of Trumpets, Day Of Atonement, Feast Of Tabernacles, The Last Great Day. #4) COG: Has Baptism By Immersion #5) COG: Laying On Of Hands #6) COG: KEEPS God's Food Laws #7) COG: Etc.
Q: Are any churches perfect?
A: Of course not, how ridiculous! If you're insisting on perfection you'll be looking for a church until the Second Coming!
But the good news is that anyone who has seen that there is indeed a New Testament basis for obeying God (for example in keeping His 7th Day Sabbath) thankfully has much to choose from!
As I said, I will not waste my breath with people with the attitudes of the hostile posters, however I WILL recommend to anyone that would SINCERELY desire to more fully understand Bible doctrines as put forth by Jesus and the Apostles in the first century and the reasons to STILL follow their ways of living and their ways of worship in the twenty-first, to simply read:
Faith And Doctrines Of The Early Church
By GM Bowers
Free PDF
(NOTE: Has some typos, etc., inadvertently gained from the transcription process not found in the original book.)
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!” (1 John 2:3-4).
Notice that the "keep the commandments of God" is reduced, primarily, to obeying the OT Sabbath observance, which was SPECIFICALLY given to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL as a sign.
No one can be justified with God by the works of the Law, as Scripture clearly teaches.
Christintine said: "Craig, we are forbidden to make an image of The Father apparently or to make images that we worship as things in themselves as distinct from relative veneration of God or saints they represent, GOD HAS MADE HIS OWN IMAGE WHICH IS JESUS and we can make images of that image. "
What kind of logic is that? So, if God forbids something, and then He has to abide by that commandment? We are talking about God here, right? He is the Creator, and we are the creation, right? I guess my question is: Is Christine infallable even when she speaks ex-cathedra?
Dr. Warns New COVID-19 Vaccine Is Untested And Will Alter Your DNA
Dr Carrie Madej, an Internal Medicine Specialist claims that the COVID-19 Vaccine Could Be Trojan Horse To Patent Humans as it will change your DNA.
Dr Carrie Madej, DO is a Internal Medicine Specialist in McDonough, GA and has over 19 years of experience in the medical field. She graduated from Kansas City Univ Of Medicine Bioscience College Of Osteopathic Medicine medical school in 2001.
Now the interesting fact that many have missed is that if you are not of Israel then you cannot be under the New Covenant as it was only made with Israel. You may now be thinking that cannot be, but it is and this is something that the majority do not understand.
What people said about masks during 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic . . .
A different pandemic swept across the world a century ago, killing about 60 million people.
Schools and businesses closed, and many cities required people to wear face masks to slow the spread of the devastating influenza outbreak of 1918. And back then, just like today, some people balked at the idea of the government telling them what to do.
Some protested and totally defied local orders as World War I raged in Europe, J. Alexander Navarro, assistant director at the University of Michigan’s Center for the History of Medicine, wrote this month for The Conversation.
About 2,000 members of the so-called Anti-Mask League gathered in San Francisco in 1919 “for a rally denouncing the mask ordinance and proposing ways to defeat it,” Navarro wrote.
Sound familiar?
Face masks have been a political and cultural flash point in the United States as the country struggles to contain the coronavirus pandemic, which has killed more than 140,000 people in the country since March.
In Michigan, some people carried assault rifles into the state Capitol building this spring to protest the governor’s orders, drawing international attention. Similar protests have played out in cities across the country.
During the flu pandemic, which killed 675,000 Americans in 1918 and 1919, “noncompliance and outright defiance quickly became a problem,” Navarro wrote of face-mask mandates. “Many businesses, unwilling to turn away shoppers, wouldn’t bar unmasked customers from their stores. Workers complained that masks were too uncomfortable to wear all day.”
Much like today, some people pleaded for compliance. Headlines from Chicago newspapers in 1919 declared, “Open-face sneezers to be arrested.” “Police raid saloons in war on influenza; Keep church windows open.” “’Nonessential’ crowds barred in epidemic war.”
In an October 1918 advertisement in the Oakland (California) Tribune, the Red Cross said, “A gauze mask is 99% proof against influenza.” The ad continued: “Doctors wear them. Those who do not wear them get sick. The man or woman or child who will not wear a mask now is a dangerous slacker.”
The 1918 pandemic started in the spring, but did not raise many alarms until that fall, killing more than 20 million people in a matter of weeks in October and November, according to the National Archives.
“The scale of the disease created mass panic. Churches and schools were closed, while local businesses and services that remained opened struggled with staff shortages. Too frightened to go out in public, people isolated themselves in their homes, leaving the streets nearly empty,” the National Archives said.
In late November 1918, The Rocky Mountain News in Denver quoted the city’s mayor as he called for everyone to wear face masks: “The wearer is not only protecting himself, but is protecting others. It is the moral obligation of every person to wear a mask in a street car or in a store.”
Health experts have made similar morality pleas amid coronavirus: If you won’t wear a mask for yourself, do it for others, they say.
“Cloth face coverings are meant to protect other people in case the wearer is unknowingly infected but does not have symptoms,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.
So how did Denver’s mandate go over 102 years ago? It “was almost totally ignored by the people; in fact, the order was cause of mirth,” according to a report from the Rocky Mountain News at the time.
Just a note to avoid any possible confusion in the future: I had put a chart comparing JATA (Jesus And The Apostles) with the COG (Church Of God) and therefore I find it now necessary to mention that that COG most emphatically does NOT INCLUDE the so-named MWSCOG which has appears to have a number of the aforementioned COG's basic doctrines BUT has added such things as these...
"Beliefs and practices
"The church believes in God the Father and God the Mother,[9] claiming to be restoring the truth and practices of the early Church.[3] The church also believes that co-founder Jang Gil-ja is God the Mother, as taught by the founder Ahn Sahng-hong.[10]
"The World Mission Society Church of God believes that all of its teachings are based on the Bible, as explained in the numerous books written by Ahn Sahng-hong.
"Second coming of Christ
"The Church believes that Ahn Sahng-hong is the Second Coming of Jesus, who came with a new name, the name of the Holy Spirit and it states that he fulfilled biblical prophecies that only Jesus could have fulfilled.[11]"
'The Day Of The Lord' isn't Sunday but is rather the time of God's judgment on the world (John was 'in' the yet-to-be Day Of The Lord via a vision: "I was IN THE SPIRIT on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, saying, 'I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,' and, 'What you see, write in a book...'" Rev. 1:10-11a
"The Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up." (Peter 3:10)
-And if one WAS going to call a particular day of the WEEK 'The Lord's Day':
There's a distinction in the Greek between "the Day of the Lord" (hēmera kyriou / hē hēmera tou kyriou -- 1 Peter 3:10 / 2 Thess 2:2, and etc.) and "the Lord's Day" (tē kyriakē hēmera). See my posts @ 12:33 & 12:37 PM above for the difference between kyrios (noun) and kyriakos (adjective; though I misspelled this as kyriokos).
This distinction is carried out in early church writings, as well, with the former referring to eschatology ("the Day of the Lord"), the latter to the first day of the week, aka Resurrection Day, aka Sunday ("the Lord's Day"), thereby confirming the difference.
The Bible leaves no record of the first-century church worshipping or celebrating the resurrection on Sunday. Sometimes Revelation 1:10—"I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice"—is used as biblical authority for calling Sunday "the Lord's Day." Notice, however, that this verse does not say the "first day of the week" or "Sunday" is what John calls "the Lord's day."
We must remember two vital facts about the book of Revelation: First, it is a book of prophecy primarily concerning the time of Christ's coming and the events that lead up to it (Revelation 1:1-3, 7). Second, it is written by a Jew steeped in the language of the Old Testament. To him, the phrase en teé kuriakeé heeméra ("on the Lord's day")—and its Hebrew or Aramaic equivalent—would imply what is called in the Old Testament "the Day of the Lord," the time of the coming destruction that climaxes in the return of Christ (Isaiah 13:6, 9; Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11, 31; Amos 5:18; etc.).
In the introduction to E.W. Bullinger's Commentary on Revelation, he explains definitively that the "Lord's day" in Revelation 1:10 is not talking about the first day of the week:
In [Revelation 1:10] we are told that John saw and received this revelation on "the Lord's Day." Leaving the former part of this verse for the present, let us notice the latter expression, "the Lord's Day." 4
The majority of people, being accustomed from their infancy to hear the first day of the week called the Lord's Day, conclude in their own minds that that day is thus called in [Revelation 1:10] because that was the name of it. But the contrary is the fact: the day is so called by us because of this verse.
In the New Testament this day is always called "the first day of the week." (See Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2 2, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; I Corinthians 16:2.) Is it not strange that in this one place a different expression is thought to refer to the same day? And yet, so sure are the commentators that it means Sunday, that some go as far as to say it was "Easter Sunday," and it is for this reason that Revelation 1:10-19 is chosen in the New Lectionary of the Church of England as the 2nd Lesson for Easter Sunday morning.
There is no evidence of any kind that "the first day of the week" was ever called "the Lord's Day" before the Apocalypse was written. That it should be so called afterwards is easily understood, and there can be little doubt that the practice arose from the misinterpretation of these words in [Revelation 1:10]. It is incredible that the earliest use of a term can have a meaning which only subsequent usage makes intelligible.
On the contrary, it ceased to be called by its Scripture name ("the First day of the week"), not because of any advance of Biblical truth or reverence, but because of declension from it. The Greek "Fathers" of the [mainstream professing Christian] Church were converts from Paganism: and it is not yet sufficiently recognized how much of Pagan rites and ceremonies and expressions they introduced into the Church; and how far Christian ritual was elaborated from and based upon Pagan ritual by the Church of Rome. Especially is this seen in the case of baptism.5
It was these Fathers who, on their conversion, brought the title "Sunday" into the Church from the Pagan terminology which they had been accustomed to use in connection with their Sun-worship.
Justin Martyr (114-165 AD) in his second Apology (i.e., his second defense of Christianity), says, 6 in chap. 67. on "The weekly worship of the Christians," - "On the day called SUN-DAY all who live in the country gather together to one place... SUN-DAY is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of SATURN [i.e., Saturn's day]; and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the SUN, having appeared to his apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration."
It is passing strange that if John called the first day of the week "the Lord's Day," we find no trace of the use of such a title until a hundred years later. And that though we do find a change, it is to "Sunday," and not the "the Lord's Day" - a name which has become practically universal.7
Some Christians still perpetuate the name of the Lord's Day for Sunday: but it is really the survival of a Pagan name, with a new meaning, derived from a misunderstanding of [Revelation 1:10].
Objection has been taken to the interpretation of "the Lord's Day" here, because we have (in [1:10]) the adjective "Lord's" instead of the noun (in regimen), "of the Lord," as in the Hebrew. But what else could it be called in Hebrew? Such objectors do not seem to be aware of the fact that there is no adjective for "Lord's" in Hebrew; and therefore the only way of expressing "the Lord's Day" is by using the two nouns, "the day of the Lord" - which means equally "the Lord's Day" (Jehovah's day). It is useless, therefore, to make any objection on this ground; for if a Hebrew wanted to say "the Lord's Day," he must say "the day of the Lord."
In the Greek there are two ways of expressing this (as in modern languages); either by saying literally, as in Hebrew, "the day of the Lord" (using the two nouns); or by using the adjective "Lord's" instead. It comes to exactly the same thing as to signification; the difference lies only in the emphasis.
The natural way of qualifying a noun is by using an adjective, as here - (kyriakee) Lord's; and, when this is done, the emphasis takes its natural course, and is placed on the noun thus qualified ("day"). But when the emphasis is required to be placed on the word "Lord;" then, instead of the adjective, the noun would be used in the genitive case, "of the Lord." In the former case (as in [Revelation 1:10]), it would be "the Lord's DAY." In the latter case it would be "THE LORD'S day." The same day is meant in each case, but with a different emphasis.
By way of illustration and proof, we may call attention to the fact that we have the corresponding expressions concerning another "day." In Luke 17:22 we have "the days of the Son of Man," where the emphasis must be on "THE SON OF MAN" (as shown by the context). While in I Corinthians 4:3 we have "man's DAY," with the emphasis on "day," marking that "day" as being actually present, as it now is. This is so clear from the context that it is actually translated "judgment," which is exactly what it means. The apostle says - "It is a very small thing, that I should be judged of you, or of man's DAY." The emphasis is on day, because the time in which we now live is the time, or "day," when man is judging. Another day is coming, and that is the day when the Lord will be present, and He will be the judge. This is the reason why the adjective (anthropinee) man's is used in I Corinthians 4:3; and this is why (kyriakee), Lord's is used in Revelation 1:9. So far from the use of the adjective being an argument against our conclusion, it is an argument in favor of it. For what is the "DAY of the Lord" or "the LORD'S day"? The first occurrence of the expression (which is the key to its meaning) is in Isaiah 2:11.8 It is the day when "the lofty looks of man shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the Lord alone shall be exalted.
That is the one great object of all the future events, seen by John in vision, and recorded for us in the Apocalypse. ... http://www.sabbath.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Basics.FAQ/ID/168/What-is-Lords-Day--Revelation-1-10.htm
This issue is not necessarily an understanding of "Sabbath" as opposed to "Sunday" (being anachronistic for the moment for convenience' sake), understood as the day of the week of Jesus' resurrection (and especially not the actual day of Jesus' Resurrection, aka "Easter"), that is, the first day of the week. I've not stated that Rev 1:10 indicates that the term used there was meant to replace "the Lord's day" with the Sabbath. Let's not conflate the two issues.
Now, to the claims in the article you cite. First, though I generally respect Bullinger's scholarship, he is not always right (and none of us are). In this case, the evidence does not support him. Nor does the Biblical evidence support the overall claims.
As to the use of two Hebrew nouns for "the Day of the Lord", this is true (yom yhwh); however, every time the LXX translates these words it is with the usual hēmera kyriou / hē hēmera tou kyriou, as noted above. And this is carried over into the NT. Thus, it's curious John the Revelator didn't use this same convention if his intention was to indicate the eschatological "Day of the Lord". There must be a reason for the distinction. What I presented above makes the most sense.
Thank you but I wasn't attempting to conflate the issue but merely pointing out that if John had wanted to call a day of the week The Lord's Day he would've chosen the Day Jesus is Lord of.
I stated that because the link you provided is under the heading “Sabbath”. Thus, it is an attempt to uphold “Saturday” Sabbath, which is fine in and of itself, but it seems that it is using its interpretation of Rev 1:10 in an attempt to refute a “Sunday” Sabbath. I say, let the context speak for itself when viewed in its immediate context, the larger context of the book of Revelation, and the larger context of Scripture in general. The usage in Rev 1:10 is unique and completely at odds with the phraseology of the eschatological “the Day of the Lord” of other Scripture, which likely indicates it means something different.
In any case, I didn’t plan on getting into a long debate on this subject, but even the claim here falls short:
The natural way of qualifying a noun is by using an adjective, as here - (kyriakee) Lord's; and, when this is done, the emphasis takes its natural course, and is placed on the noun thus qualified ("day"). But when the emphasis is required to be placed on the word "Lord;" then, instead of the adjective, the noun would be used in the genitive case, "of the Lord." In the former case (as in [Revelation 1:10]), it would be "the Lord's DAY." In the latter case it would be "THE LORD'S day." The same day is meant in each case, but with a different emphasis.
This appears to be an imposition of English upon the Greek. Greek is a highly inflected language, which means all the words are conjugated in such specific ways that the function of the word within a sentence is made clear just by its spelling. This means that words can be placed almost anywhere in a given sentence. That’s not to say there isn’t a typical ordering. There is. So, when a word is placed ahead of another (or when one that’s typically earlier in a sentence is placed further back), emphasis is (or may be) implied. In any given adjective-noun combination, either one can precede the other. Typically, the one in front is emphatic.
Given this, the quote above has it exactly backwards, which then makes the rest wrong. In the phraseology used for “the Day of the Lord”, two nouns are used—one (day) followed by a genitive (Lord), the latter delimiting the former. It’s not just any “Day”, so which “Day”? “Day of the Lord”. So, “Day” in “Day of the Lord” (which means “time” of the Lord, as opposed to one single day) is the one emphasized. Same with “Days of the Son of Man” (Luke 17:22): All are nouns, and all are in the genitive as part of a prepositional phrase. Since “Days” comes first, this is the head noun, with “Son” and “Man” each delimiting “Days” in a chain. Which “Days”? “Days of the Son”. Which “Son”? “The Son of Man”.
But even this is an over-simplification. Is the genitive noun objective or subjective in relation to its head noun? See here: https://mcluhansnewsciences.com/mcluhan/2014/10/objective-and-subjective-genitives/
I think that a translation rather than the original may lie at the bottom of any textual difficulty:
"And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS"
Did Jesus Have A Tattoo On His Thigh In Revelation 19:16?
By Ann Naffziger 09/27/2013
The verse in question here is the only verse in the New Testament that appears to suggest that Jesus had something “inscribed” on his body. However, such a suggestion is in direct contradiction of a law in Leviticus 19:28 “You shall not make any gashes in your flesh for the dead or tattoo any marks upon you.” Not only would the idea of a Jewish man having a tattoo be shocking, even more so is the suggestion that his thigh would be exposed, something basically equated with public nudity in Jesus’ time and religious culture.
A theory that easily explains such a contradiction is that the book of Revelation was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek as previously assumed. If that is the case, a miniscule copying error by an early scribe would easily render the Hebrew word for “banner” as “thigh” instead. The first Hebrew letter for the word “banner”, dagel, looks almost exactly like the first Hebrew letter for “thigh”, ragel. So it is posited that the correct reading of Rev 19:16 is
“And He has on His robe and on His banner a name inscribed, ‘KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS’”
Pushing that 'Hebrew original' thing hard, aren't you?
The Revelation passage is easily parsed out. If you read some English translations, you see that the title appears to be written twice: once on his thigh, and once on his garment. That makes little sense to me. A much better solution is to understand the phrase epexegetically: "on His garment, namely (kai) his thigh." That is, the text is on His garment at the area where it would be visible when he was perched atop the horse.
Coincidentally, I'm in the midst of writing an article on paraklētos in the NT. But the term is not even found in Matthew. And it wasn't even used very much in antiquity, either. And are you seriously going to post a pdf of an entire book, expecting readers here to read it?
Arguments from lack of physical evidence is not a good place to start making any sort of case. And, please don't bring up the verbiage in Eusebius. We've already been down that route.
Let's get closer to topics more closely associated with this blogspot.
My apologies, I inadvertently mentioned The Hebrew Book Of Matthew as regards to Parakletos when it was on the same topic (the Trinity) but yes indeed not the same part of that topic. And no, I didn't honestly expect people to read the whole Hebrew Gospel Of Matthew(!) [Not that reading the Bible is such a bad thing] but had just put it there handy simply for those who might've wanted to see what it said about the subject. And regarding the Trinity doctrine although not mentioning Parakletos, this is my sole point I'd like to make here about what it does have to offer on the topic:
We now have the Hebrew Matthew Gospel, a manuscript that was preserved by the Jews from the first century [Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew Gospel]. In this Shem Tov MSS, the text at Matthew 28:19 does not contain the so-called Trinitarian statement.
We went through this article at a bit of length before and (as you say) don't want to do a rehash now but I just wanted to reinforce the point that although we are used to using the Greek manuscripts we must nevertheless be at least open to the usage of others.
As far as the Book Of Revelation matter goes, although what you theorized does seem to have some merit (No offense!) but I think frankly that (at least right now) what Naffziger mentions seems to make a more convincing explanation.
We now have the Hebrew Matthew Gospel, a manuscript that was preserved by the Jews from the first century [Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew Gospel]. In this Shem Tov MSS, the text at Matthew 28:19 does not contain the so-called Trinitarian statement.
No we don’t. There is no first century Hebrew MSS of Matthew. What we have is Shem Tov’s reconstruction of what he thinks is Matthew’s Gospel in Hebrew.
As regards Matthew 28:19 and the Trinitarian statement there, I’d seen Kaszyński’s work referenced before and engaged with it. I don’t recall if it was on this particular blogspot or if it was on another that I’d engaged on that was from an anti-Trinitarian perspective. In any case, the author references a number of what amounts to duplicates in his claim that there are 80 different versions without the tri-statement. Whatever the case, there are 2 issues related to this, which I’ll identify.
(1) Comparatively, in some other places in Scripture there are hundreds, if not thousands of MSS supporting one reading, yet the near-universal understanding is that the less attested reading is original. These more numerous readings come about by later scribes dutifully replicating the (presumed) error in their (exemplar) manuscripts. Thus, lack of evidence in some MSS when compared with the presence of a reading in other MSS is not the sole reasoning for the acceptance or non-acceptance of a particular reading.
(2) Even if the tri-statement is rejected, that is, it is declared to be non-original, Trinitarian doctrine does not rise or fall on this one verse. Far from it.
You wrote: As far as the Book Of Revelation matter goes, although what you theorized does seem to have some merit (No offense!) but I think frankly that (at least right now) what Naffziger mentions seems to make a more convincing explanation.
No offense taken. But I have to question your rationale. The use of the Greek conjunction kai in epexegetical constructions is fairly common in the NT. Given this, why would you reason that a Hebrew original is the more logical explanation? This is especially odd after I illustrated that the claim you cited earlier asserting that a Greek adjective-noun is the best way to translate a Hebrew noun-noun in the “Day of the Lord” is not true, but that the LXX renders the phrase as noun-(genitive)noun as is mirrored in the NT. It seems to me you just wish to eisegetically advance a Hebrew original, as opposed to really searching for the truth of the matter.
Again, let’s get back to topics more close to those usually presented on this blog.
An archbishop recently said the Pope established a "new Church" that worships Mother Earth.
I am an indigenous/native peoples' rights advocate who has received support for my advocacy initiatives from several internationally renowned Native activists. Three paragraphs from a new article of mine are presented below.
The Roman Catholic magazine, the Crisis, published an article about the October 2019 Amazon synod. The article is titled "The Amazon Synod Goes Native." Its renowned author, William Kilpatrick, writes in the article (after researching what prominent Bishops are saying) that this synod established a "new Church," with an "Indians' eco-friendly [eco-tribalist], pantheistic form of spirituality," which is "New Age spirituality," whose adherents embrace and promote "the [hippie] ideas that became popular 60 years ago, a time when many young people thought that the 'Age of Aquarius' was about to dawn."
A good subtitle for Mr. Kilpatrick's article on the Amazon Synod would have been "The Catholic Church Goes Hippie." Cardinal Gerhard Mueller has criticized an Amazon synod document for its “hippie” language, such as “ecological conversion” and “mother earth.” Bishop Robertus Mutsaertsis condemned the Amazon Synod for attempting to establish a "new religion" by portraying Jesus "not as the Son of God and Savior," but as " Jesus the philosopher, revolutionary and hippie."
Pan-Amazon Synod Watch (PSW) is the name of the largest coalition of associations in defense of Christian civilization. It claims that the Pan-Amazon synod is "a tool to impose a radical eco-tribalist model on the Holy Catholic Church and civic society." A statement in a PSW article reads: Quoting abundantly from his encyclical Laudato Si, Pope Francis reiterates his “Teilhardian” and New Age worldview of a universe in which “everything is connected” (No. 41).
The title of my new article is "Pope Francis Preaches Eco-Tribalist | Hippie New Age Beliefs." It is located at: http://www.towahkon.org/BishopsHippiesNewAge.html
Hi Craig. Sorry I gave you that feeling! I'm just very interested in the topic and pursued it a bit more than usual as I desired your further feedback on it (as I value and appreciate your feedback)! Thank you for it. I was going to reply to your latest points here however in deference to your expressed wishes on second thought I will instead conclude the topic with you personally.
Anonymous @ 2:52 AM is the very same "Anonymous" that is obsessed with promoting one heresy after another.
He attempted to push his "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew" on the previous blog thread .... I answered him with this:
RayB said @ 7:52 PM (on previous thread, in part):
"Why would there be any value in reading the "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew," written by a man that denied the deity and messiahship of Jesus Christ?"
Here is what I found out about the heretic Shem-Tob, the author of the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew:
"Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut was the AUTHOR OF AN ANTI-CHRISTIAN religious treatise, "The Touchstone," completed in 1380 and revised in 1385 and 1400. Often referred to as "The Logic of Shem Tob", it ARGUES AGAINST THE BELIEF THAT JESUS IS GOD. It also argues against attributing the role of Messiah to Jesus. IT ALSO ARGUES AGAINST ATTRIBUTING THE ROLE OF MESSIAH TO JESUS." (Block letters used for emphasis).
"Shem-Tob's "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew," is included in his "The Touchtone," and is considered to be the oldest surviving text of a New Testament book in HEBREW."
NOTE: everything this Anonymous Armstronger posts is either representative of the teachings of a heretical cult, or, as evidenced above, elevating an author that held to heretical views of Jesus's Deity, who also denied His Messiahship. Shem-Tob HATED Biblical Christianity, and worked to destroy it through subversion. Obviously, our Annoymous Armstrong friend is in the same boat with Shem-Tob.
Here is part of what I had originally posted that our very own Sherlock Holmes has 'discovered', LOL:
The "Hebrew text of Matthew’s gospel was preserved in the body of a 14th century Jewish polemical treatise entitled Evan Bohar. The author of the treatise, one by the name of Shem Tov Ben Isaac Ben Shaprut, completed his work in 1385 A.D. and revised it several times afterwards. He utilized nine different Hebrew manuscripts of the preserved Gospel of Matthew to compile his translation. Ben Shaprut was no Christian. He was a Jewish rabbi who was writing to defend his faith against the encroachments of Christian theologians. To counter-act the teachings of Matthew, he used Matthew’s original Hebrew Gospel, and carefully compiled his translation."
Obviously, our deductively-challenged RayB friend is in the same boat with Inspector Clouseau.
P.S. And of course he implies that I was, in effect, endorsing the views of the "polemical treatise entitled Evan Bohar". Hardly that! Just letting folks know about the existence of the Hebrew Gospel Of Matthew itself (an additional resource that's all) of which the Rabbi had gotten by "utilizing nine different Hebrew manuscripts of the preserved Gospel of Matthew to compile his translation." "and carefully compiled his translation" (presumably so as to naturally base his rebuttals on the most accurate basis possible, although of course that doesn't mean that what we have now is necessarily perfect) which was extracted FROM the misguided treatise itself! That is all that the fuss is about! ROFL!!
P.P.S. And I might add that the ACTUALLY scholarly Susanna was DELIGHTED to be told about this book way back when I mentioned it earlier, so much so that she posted that she had immediately bought a copy. Add her to those "elevating an author that held to heretical views of Jesus's Deity, who also denied His Messiahship. Shem-Tob HATED Biblical Christianity, and worked to destroy it through subversion." Obviously, our Roman Catholic friend Susanna is in the same boat with Shem-Tob! LMAO
P.P.P.S. Again you just need to do no more than simply look at how he CONTINUES to DISTRACT, DISTRACT & DISTRACT from:
The BIBLE PASSAGES WHICH STATE IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS...
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own [which was, of course, on the SEVENTH day]. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!"
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!”
"We therefore realise that one should never underestimate the deceptions of Satan and know that he always attacks truth and especially what affects our salvation."
Look, let's quit messing around. This Plandemic, I mean, Pandemic, is extremely serious and we all need to follow our experts, such as America's leading expert on all things related to COVID 19, Dr. Fauci.
Forget about what he said before, you need to be like him; wear the mask, practice social distancing (and scold those that don't, even at the risk of being called a "snowflake," or worse, a "Karen"), and wash your hands.
Trustworthy Dr. Fauci leads us by his inspirational example (go to the end of the story):
God's people do, by His GRACE, driven by the faith OF Christ, keep His commandments, i.e. the "word of God."
“But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” Luke 11:28
"Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." 1 Corinthians 2:13
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:" Ephesians 6:17
"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;" 1 Timothy 6:3
"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." John 6:63
Once again, please state which OLD TESTAMENT Laws/Commandments that you choose to obey, and which do you ignore?
If you seek to be justified by THE LAW, you are bound to KEEP THE ENTIRE LAW ... not just those that your teachers have told you to follow, such as the rules governing the OT Sabbath.
When Christ's disciples picked the corn on the Sabbath, were they violating the OT Sabbath laws? What do you have to say about that?
Covington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann WINS ANOTHER ONE ... this time he wins against the slanderous Washington Post as the lying slime at the WaPo agree to pay a settlement.
As I said already RayB, don't bother asking me any more questions. You're re-asking a question that I've already answered at length (much to paul's delight) and you're STILL issuing edicts.
I guess the media would say this is a "peaceful protest" while exercising their idea of "Democracy," i.e., "you got what I want, I take what I want" ....
Father Daughter Violently Beaten at Deli in de Blasio's New York City ....
This is what is coming to America on a massive scale if the Marxists at BLM & ANTIFA, etc. get their way.
Brilliant! In response to HR 7573, “Rep. Louie Gohmert pulled off a master troll on the House Floor introducing a resolution to ban the Democrat party for their history of slavery.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrVscRrwo34 start 10 minutes time stmp before that they are getting the chat set up. Icons, Idols & Iconoclasm - Jay Dyer / Snek I think RayB gets his notion about Jesus' body changing from Turettin. This is a gnostic idea basically.
The Lord's Day is SUNDAY the day He rose on and beginning of the new creation (the old creation began on the first day of the week). II Cor. 16:10 refers to the first day of the week as if it were routine. ditto Acts 20:7.
Sunday isn't the sabbath the seventh day that God rested on, and commemorating His being the sole creator. Constantine helped an existing practice of first day of the week worship when he made the first day first half work free. the sabbath is among the tings we don't observe says Col. 2:16, because (contet preceding) it is one of those things that point to Christ's coming, but now He is come.
"'given your position that theophanies were of the pre-incarnate Christ (I don’t disagree), then HOW CAN WE MAKE IMAGES OF THE INCARNATE CHRIST/YHWH?"
BECAUSE HE HAS BECOME PHYSICAL. duh.
"It’s a non sequitur to conclude that we are permitted to make icons of Jesus because God/YHWH made an image of Himself in the Person of Christ:"
says who?
"How do we split the Trinity in such a fashion as to imply tritheism? That is, if the Father is YHWH and the Son is YHWH (see Jude 1:5, e.g.), why is the Father not permitted to be made into an icon while the Son is? What Scripture makes this distinction, providing this allowance?"
How is this splitting the Trinity? they are distinct persons though one substance and coeternal and coomnipresent. Is it splitting the Trinity to distinguish them as they were distinguished in the defense of the Trinity against anti trinitarians, the pro trinitarians saying The Father is without origin. The Son and The Holy Spirit each haveir divine substance and nature from the Father independently of each other, but while they originate in The Father they are coeternal with him there was never a time when either of them did not exist.
Why no image of The Father? Because He is too brilliant and too incomprehensible and so forth. He has no imge except what He made His Son to be, you can sort of refer to Him like the image of Jesus' baptism.
you may not need an icon to support the incarnation in your mind, but it nonetheless testifies of it, and testifies that God uses matter and blessed matter and made matter, the source of evil is not in the realm of matter, which is good to neutral, but of spirit, where bad intentions begin, played out in the realm of matter. AND EVERYONE ISN'T YOU.
paul, your question is so incoherent and doesn't sound like you understand my statement I can't answer it, please rephrase? Are you saying God is or isn't bound by His own rules? do you even understand those rules?
protestant acceptance or rejection of a council has no bearing on it being ecumenical, you guys qualify as somewhat heretical ditto Roman Catholicism so you don't count anyway. Also you didn't exist back then. (don't drag up bogomils and similar cathars, who denied the goodness of the material universe and denied the real presence in the Eucharist, contrary to Luther on both points the denial prots are used to is Calvin more than Luther influence.)
You wrote (in part): How is this splitting the Trinity? they are distinct persons though one substance and coeternal and coomnipresent.
In speaking of the ‘Persons’, we cannot separate Christ’s substance (ousia, as in one common homoousios) from His humanity, can we? That would imply Nestorianism, as you well know. A statue depicting His humanity at the expense of His Deity does just that. Similarly, in efforts to maintain the integrity of Christ’s Divine-human Person, we cannot separate His substance (ousia) from the one Trinitarian substance (homoousios), can we? That would be separating the Trinity, implying tritheism. Yet this is precisely what is entailed in a Christ-statute if Nestorianism is to be averted, while simultaneously claiming said statue does not depict any other ‘Person’ of the Trinity.
Claiming that a Christ-statue poses no problem to Christian orthodoxy is a matter of wanting your Christological and Trinitarian cake and eating it too. It amounts to heresy.
Let me restate a portion of the Gerald O’Collins quote from earlier, while also filling in the portion I initially placed in an ellipse (italics in original, bold added):
“How then are the divine relationships crucial and unique? They are just that because being person in God is defined only through relationship to the other persons. (Here the finite model of personhood does call for adjustment.) The three divine persons are mutually distinct only in and through their relations of origin. The internal relations between the three persons form their sole distinguishing feature. We can and should, for instance, follow Athanasius in holding that whatever we can say about the Father we can also say about the Son except that He is the Father. The Son retains his own particular, irreducible identity in relationship, as being begotten of the Father and not as being the unoriginated origin of divinity (and all reality). Thus, the (subsistent) relations account for what differentiates (and unites) the one trinitarian reality” (The Tripersonal God: Understanding and Interpreting the Trinity [Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1999], p 178).
So, given that relations of origin is the sole distinguishing feature in Trinitarian relationships, then:
(a) how can we make a statue of Jesus without collapsing the Trinity in attempting to avert Nestorianism [retaining Christ’s Divine-human ‘Person’] so as not to imply the inclusion of the substance (ousia) of the Father (or the Spirit),
(b) how can we make a statue of Jesus without expressly committing the Nestorian heresy [upholding only Christ’s humanity at the expense of the His Deity, the common homoousios] in order to avoid any notions of tritheism?
Whatever one makes of icons generally (whole different topic), we cannot make an analogy between a statue of, say, Athanasius to one of Christ because of the differentiating factor of Christ’s Deity. To look past this is to be short-sighted.
Dr. Taylor Marshall who is the person in the second video above posted this video today about two churches sabotaged yesterday. Most of us will not agree with his theology, emphasis on relics, etc., but there is no mistaking the importance of recognizing that anti-God and anti-Church persecution is growing. Churches being burned with people inside -- apparent very dangerous times we are entering.
ReplyDeleteI'm also thinking about the McCloskey family in St. Louis, Missouri who have been on the news several times lately as angry mobs surrounded their obviously elegant large home. Mobs were screaming that they were going to occupy rooms in their home. Their calls to 911 were ignored and when they finally went out with their rifles to show they would defend their home, the local prosecutor instead requested and obtained a warrant to seize their rifles and charge them with "feloious assault" for the "crime" of defending their own property.
The spirit of mob violence has clearly been unleashed and unless God holds it back, things will increase to the level mentioned by the priest in the first video above.
I will blog the video about the churches burning. To be certain, it is loaded with traditional Catholic rhetoric, but as a sign of the times, it is crucial information that certainly is not getting major media attention it deserves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Td9Cj9Drs
Constance
Constance,
ReplyDeleteLast I read, no charges have been filed against the McCloskey's, which makes the search and seizure unconstitutional, correct?
https://www.duckduckgo.com/McCloskey+Gardner+gun+seizure+unconstitutional
ReplyDeleteBill Gates company called ID 2020 and the UN along with technology developed by MIT Plan to MARK all humans in 2020 please watch this short video by HWAV (headlines with a voice) called: Will You Take The Mark? also found in the HWAV website
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLReSUVjMx4
other videos that are chilling of HWAV: Project Pelican: They Sold Out Our Navy: and What was destroyed in the Clinton House fire
Correct me if I am wrong, but did not Blacks not even have to fight for their freedom because a bunch of Whites did that for them in the American War Between The States, where over 700,000 Whites died ensuring the Black man’s freedom. REPARATIONS PAID IN FULL. Matter of fact some things never change because ignorant Whites and other outcasts still fight for Blacks in the year 2020, although it is the Whites who are enslaved this time around and the Blacks who are the privileged class. I know this sounds retarded but America in 2020 is retarded. When you consider that the AFRICANS IN AMERICA were originally bought and sold by their own people, so it isn’t as if the White man went to Africa and captured free Africans, they were already enslaved and more than likely brutalized far worse by their own, than the White man.
ReplyDeleteWelfare generation after generation, affirmative action laws that have allowed unqualified Blacks to receive jobs over better qualified Whites, etc. REPARATIONS PAID IN FULL AND THEN SOME, THE BLACKS NOW OWE WHITES.
Destruction of our major cities, MILLIONS of White victims over the years to Black violence. How many Whites have been raped, murdered or beaten at the hands of Blacks from 1865-2020, IT WOULD TOTAL MILLIONS. White cops killing or beating Blacks? Compare that number to the number of White cops who have been beaten or killed by Black thugs or better yet, compare that number to the number of Whites killed by cops.
I think Blacks have been paid their reparations and then some and THEY OWE US and THEIR ANCESTORS, if not for being shipped from Africa, most would be living in squalor and swatting flies from their face while they dropped a deuce on their dirt floor. This is nothing but more EXTORTION AND THEY LEARNED THOSE TECHNIQUES FROM THE KING OF EXTORTION RACKET. You wanna guess who the king of the extortion racket is?
"most would be living in squalor and swatting flies from their face while they dropped a deuce on their dirt floor."
ReplyDeletedropped a deuce? you mean a 'turd' !
Christine Erikson, you have the personality of a broken chair.
ReplyDeleteDo face masks really work? What if the mask that you think is protecting you is invected due to improper handling, etc. ?
Here's an illustration, using common sense and a little science ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFnUGSr3fw0
Kris seems to be her White Power(ed) sibling.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe true state of the U. S. economy. Warning: not for the faint at heart.
http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-sinking-titanics-great-pumps.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+google%2FRzFQ+%28oftwominds%29
Best cure for C-19: Put Dr. Fauxci and Dr. Birx , ilk,
ReplyDeleteon a SpaceX ship bound for Mars.
Doesn’t need to be a big ship.
Use sardine packing method.
Bob Dylan’s New Christian Themed Album
ReplyDeleteHow Civil War Black Soldiers Helped the Union Win
ReplyDeleteThe African American soldiers who served in the United States army and navy during the Civil War made great sacrifices for the nation. The highest number of black soldiers serving at one time during the Civil War was 186,017 men...
[But at first they were denied even the right to fight by a prejudiced public and a reluctant government.]
https://www.civilwaracademy.com/civil-war-black-soldiers
SGT Report :
ReplyDelete"We Are At War: America's Bolshevik Revolution" -- interview with Wayne Jett
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moBYZlZcc2o
ReplyDeleteControversial Vaccine Movie Banned by Netflix & Apple ...
Find out why, as revealed by its well known and respected Award Winning producer, Del Matthew Bigtree.
If you want to know the truth about vaccines, don't miss watching this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX95m5kXMBU
ReplyDeleteShort TV News reports on the Vaccine (Vaxxed) movie being pulled from being shown at an international film festival in Houston.
The pressure to cancel the showing of this film came from "high ups" in the Government. WHY ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDw7zzNgNkQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeIUjAHo5PI
Over 400 'Vaxxed'/Related Videos
ReplyDeleteConstance, it's interesting that the mainstream news media failed to mention that these mobs were screaming that they were going to 'occupy rooms' in the McCloskey's home!!! With the media's careful 'editing'... instead, the story became all about this couple appearing to 'threaten' the mob with their guns.. as if this couple was unnecessarily behaving in a paranoid manner against 'peaceful' protesters. OUTRAGEOUS!!!
ReplyDeleteWhy are these options being dismissed or ignored?
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't medical deep state want coronavirus patients to heal?
One solution that we continue to emphasize is the hydroxychloroquine-plus-zinc remedy, which many researchers have validated as safe and effective.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-07-12-why-doesnt-medical-deep-state-want-coronavirus-patients-heal.html
West Texas doctor reverses coronavirus symptoms in 100% of cases with inexpensive treatment
Dr. Richard Bartlett shares his $200 treatment: enhaling a steroid called budesonide, using a nebulizer, with many patients experiencing a rapid relief from Covid symtoms after the first treatment.
https://beforeitsnews.com/health/2020/07/texas-doctor-reverses-coronavirus-symptoms-in-100-of-cases-with-inexpensive-treatment-3031007.html
Wake up call for America . . .
ReplyDeleteWhen a Covid-19 patient in ICU is placed on a ventilator, that patient is then sedated, goes to sleep and never wakes up.
Nurse Erin Marie Olszewski recorded her experience while working at Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, New York.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIDsKdeFOmQ
I am Not Kris Erikson and African culture was and is better than shitting on the floor.
ReplyDeleteCraig, I didn't say or think JEsus is the same as the Father in a physical way, but that they are alike in every way but distinct persons. There is a prohibition on trying to depict The Father, but it got done two or three times anyway.
you agree with the point about honoring what a flag or other image is about, not the image itself, then I don't see the problem in honoring icons of saints or of Jesus.
God made Jesus His image, so I don't see why we can't make images of Jesus. The earliest images are kind of not that recognizeable except by designation or action, but some time after the images on the Veil of Veronica and shroud that later became known as The Shroud of Turin (C14 dates are compromised by the smoke and mending portions from a fire it survived) then certain specific points develop in art that match these. The blood type on them match also.
LUKE 24:16 "BUT THEIR EYES WERE RESTRAINED, SO THAT THEY DID NOT KNOW HIM" supernatural prevention of recognizing Him, not a change about Him, Mary MAgdalene recognized Him instantly when she LOOKED directly at Him she thought He was the gardner when she was crying, eyes full of tears and just noting someone there then He spoke to her. Of course her assumption would be it was only someone similar at first, since Resurrection wasn't expected. Paul says at least 500 other people saw Him and knew obviously it was Him or this wouldn't be relevant.
BREAKING NEWS
ReplyDeleteReuters
Washington Redskins Officially Announce Name Change
The National Football League's Washington Redskins officially announced Monday that they will change the team's 87-year-old name that activists have claimed is offensive to Native Americans.
The new name will be...
THE WASHINGTON CRIMSON EPIDERMISES
Craig it's interesting on the last thread you posted about Trump's meeting at Gateway Church. You had also asked me for evidence of the seven mountain mandate infecting the white house. It's certainly alive and well at Gateway Church. Bob is a heretical prosperity gospel charismania false teacher.
ReplyDeleteHere's a quote from Robert Morris:
"And please understand, if you don’t tithe that’s an open door to demons. Because that is exactly what the enemy does. He’s a thief. And you’re allowing god. You’re robbing- you’re allowing satan to get you to be a thief. But not only a thief but to steal you from God. And I don’t say that to make you feel condemned or to argue about tithing, I’m telling you, that’s an open door. No matter how many doors you close in your life. If you’re not tithing, you’ve always got an open door to the demons.” – Robert Morris, “Non-tithers OPEN THE DOOR TO DEMONS!!” Says False Teacher Robert Morris, YouTube, Published by Exit Churchianity on Oct 8, 2013."
Bishop Jackson has long been a charismania false teacher advocating 7 mountain mandate and claiming to be a prophet of God.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmKOcza_UyQ
Trump is not very discerning when it comes to surrounding himself with true Christians. Here's a partial list of false teachers that visited the white house:
https://www.andyrowell.net/andy_rowell/2019/12/list-of-worship-leaders-gathering-at-the-white-house-on-friday-dec-6-2019.html
Even the secular world has figured out it's something else besides real Christianity.
https://theoutline.com/post/8856/seven-mountain-mandate-trump-paula-white?zd=1&zi=tshvgojc
Anon 8:09 PM,
ReplyDeleteYour comment only provides a 'guilt-by-association' "evidence". I want actual proof that Trump adheres to the 7 Mountains mandate. Does he advance policy that reflects this? Not that I've seen, but I'm willing to be shown that it exists.
Leftist loves her new microchipped hand!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.citizenfreepress.com/column-1/leftist-loves-her-new-microchipped-hand/
Law and Grace
ReplyDeletePart One
Part 2
Part 3
Doctrines That Divide: Law & Grace
"For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified."
Romans 2:13 KJV
ReplyDeleteAnd the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14
The law God gave Moses at Sinai is the truth. The truth of what is righteous and holy, perfect, telling us how to perfectly relate to God and our fellow man. It has told us the truth about ourselves, we cannot keep it, only break it. That holy and true standard we could not keep, but Jesus Christ, God come in the flesh, did. So He kept it in our behalf, that His grace could, would, afford us forgiveness, therefore giving us our right standing with God in truth once again. Jesus, the Son, is the truth, and He is grace, perfectly balanced, and when He finished His salvation work on the earth, then He was seated at the right hand of God the Father, and there He is today.
His Spirit, equally God, comes to dwell in the believer by faith, when we see ourselves in the law we have broken and repent before God, who looks at Jesus in our stead and counts us righteous by that blood that paid the debt of the law we broke. The Spirit's indwelling the heart of persons, sanctifies us, makes us, merely human, but forgiven human beings, justified at the moment we trust Jesus, able to keep the law of God in the strength of God. It is the mystery of Christ in you, in me, when we believe, law and grace housed together, the Lord at home in our hearts.
We are given great grace and space to come to God through Jesus our Savior, but we have a free will that can refuse what Jesus paid to freely give us. It is appointed unto man once to die and then the judgment. Hebrews 9:27
What grace cannot humble, judgment must befall.
Be humbled by His law, that you may receive grace and live...
...today do not harden your heart.
John 1:12 is for someone reading this:
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.
First, when you see a large gathering of lions, you can presume the leader of the pack is also a lion.
ReplyDeleteThese bethel'ites have their hooks deep into Trump and he eats up their praise and Lance Wallnau's "Cyrus anointing" with narcissistic delight. Just him running around at their whim to conferences and such and leaning into these false teachers as actual advisors even on completely secular matters is evidence of 7MM behavior. He has elevated these charismania wolves and adulterers to the top of the government and military "mountains".
Further - the 7MM take over is supposed to be a ninja operation. They are not wearing name tags and grabbing microphones. Lance Wallnau asserts Satan is in control of academia, entertainment, politics and business: “Our real enemies are the ones that are shaping laws, shaping media, and shaping the next generation". To fight them, he’s promoting what he calls the ‘7M Underground’ — an affiliation of producers, directors, attorneys, politicians and economists." Wallnau continues: “I’m working with believers that I call ninja sheep — those are believers that are actual believers but have to maintain discretion with their public profile."
Other evidence: Betsy Devos -- Education Secretary - conquering the education kingdom for God.
Betsy is an elder at false teacher, Rob Bell's, Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Michigan. After Bell left she largely funded his odd Nooma film series.
DeVos in 2001 listed education activism and reform efforts as a means to "advance God's Kingdom". In an interview that year, she also said that "changing the way we approach ... the system of education in the country ... really may have greater Kingdom gain in the long run".
Just read this and you should recognize this is all 7MM agenda material. It may sell well to the undiscerning true Christians; but these new age charismaniacs are just pretending here. They want secular government largely out of the education business and open up funding avenues and opportunities for private [mostly white] religious schools to take over (i.e. - the religious take over of education).
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-secretary-education-betsy-devos-announces-proposed-rule-regarding-equal-treatment-faith-based-education-institutions-provides-updated-school-prayer-guidance
Also don't forget, Betsy DeVos's brother, Erik Prince, a former U.S. Navy SEAL officer, is the founder of Blackwater USA, a theocratic mercenary private military services contractor, much like Hitler's Sturmabteilung (Brown Shirts) have been resurrected by Trump's administration.
https://www.forbes.com/return-of-erik-prince/#66af454a50aa
Finally, 7MM policies and practices have some interesting parallels with Marxism. http://www.evangelicalreview.com/01-2018_ter_tanksley-&-schaich_'marxist-7mm.pdf
https://www.duckduckgo.com/Trump+seven+mountains
ReplyDeleteThe Devos foundation has extensive ties to dominionists.
ReplyDeleteFirst I came upon the Liberty Institute. They sound great to the typical Christian. Fighting against religious persecution sounds great. They hide their new age dominionist beliefs deep inside. But founder Kelly Shackelford started out at Jim Whitehead, Rutherford Institute in Virginia. The Rutherford Institute was funded largely by Richard and Helen Devos and was dedicated to the concept of "Christian Reconstructionism" (aka "Dominionism"). Mr. Shackelford left the Rutherford Institute to set up his own legal firm, now called the "Liberty Institute" in Austin, Texas, now "First Liberty Institute". Mr. Shackelford even gave the video message this past July 5th at the heretic, Roger Morris's Gateway Church in Texas. If you are familiar with dominionist/7MM concepts you can hear it in his "message"; but if you aren't --- he sounds like he's doing wonderful work for God. Here's Shackelford on video with heretic Andrew Wommack's "Truth and Liberty Live" broadcast where the into flat out affirms their 7 spheres of influence/mountain agenda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpIt3D_o_XY
How does this tie to Trump? These people and groups all tie into the Federalist Society. Trump has appointed a boatload of federal judges out of this dominionist cover "society". This cult member was even appointed for life by Trump to a Federal District Court judgeship right out of Shackelford's offices. https://firstliberty.org/news/taking-the-oath/
Further, the Devos Foundation gave $5,000,000 to fund the work of dominionist, D. James Kennedy (deceased in 2007) of the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Ft. Lauderdale. You may be more familiar with his ecumenical dominionist organization, Truth in Action. Here's some info on them: https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/transforming_culture_beware.html
Dick Devos (along with Edgar Prince) was a founding member of the Council for National Policy launched right out of the John Birch Soceity. This website has discussed and debated the evil of the CNP for years.
Face it - the "Religious Right" was a largely new age pentecostal "dominionist" political organization set out to create an extra-biblical ecumenical Theocracy in America. It is/was not of God. God does not need us seizing political power or making his return happen. ........ But maybe it will be ok if we just apply the Trump and Devos family pastor Norman V. Peale's power of positive thinking. Covid-19 will magical disappear, all the jobs and more are coming back, the stock market is tremendous, we are doing awesome and our country is "prospering" and "healed". Look around at how "great" Trump is making America.
This D. James Kennedy. wow.
ReplyDelete- Kennedy is a proponent of the teaching known as the Gospel in the Stars, which is nothing more than a "Christian" interpretation of astrology and occultism, in much the same class as so-called "Biblical" pyramidology and numerology. In fact, Kennedy even calls this teaching "Biblical astrology." The following is excerpted from a 1992 brochure promoting Kennedy's book and book on audiotape, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac.
"What Does Your Future Hold? Listen to Dr. D. James Kennedy's book on audio tape, The Real Meaning of the Zodiac. Discover what he calls Biblical astrology or the 'Gospel in the stars.' What does the Bible tell us about the Zodiac and astrology? Startling discoveries related by eminent theologian Dr. D. James Kennedy prove that God created the Zodiac! God intended the stars to foretell the future of the world! Discover what Dr. Kennedy calls Biblical astrology, or the 'Gospel in the stars' Dr. Kennedy clearly proves from Scripture that astrology is nothing more than a satanic perversion of the original revelation of God As you listen to The Real Meaning of the Zodiac, you will gain new knowledge of God's sovereignty over all creation and gain valuable insight into a deception that is anything but harmless." (Emphasis in original.)
http://jbeard.users.rapidnet.com/bdm/exposes/kennedy/general.htm
Constance & Co:
ReplyDelete(This sound at all familiar?)
‘ISRAEL’S ORACLE’ DELIVERS BIG MESSAGE FROM GOD: “MESSIAH IS HERE!”
By Dr. Rivkah Lambert Adler
Breaking Israel News
Jul 9, 2020
“So I ask, I beg the people of Israel, come home! Come home! Moshaich is here and he’s waiting but Hashem is not giving him the sign to be revealed."
https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/154491/israeli-oracle-delivers-message-god-jews-america-deep-trouble
Craig posted on the last thread:
ReplyDelete"By chance, are you receiving your information, in part, from vlogger On Point Preparedness?"
Never heard of him or it, but I'll check it out.
Anon 1:24 PM,
ReplyDeleteIf you're going to do that, check this out as well:
Tangled Up in Quasi-Truth
The guy makes lots of nebulous connections and illogical leaps. The compounding of his syllogisms got him so far off point that I was induced to write a blog post to illustrate. If you are pressed for time, you could just scroll down to the ¿Qué? section to see what I mean.
I take that back. I have seen some "On Point Preparedness" videos. When I was critical here of Judy Mikovits in Plandemic, I googled, found and I think I posted a video here from "On Point Preparedness" that also was critical of the whole new age anti-vax conspiracy marriage of the movie.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VtTv51152o&list=UU9pLAJfsadl_133T7-bgitA&index=18&t=0s
I may have seen another video by him on youtube a time or two. I sometimes surf youtube on my TV. The logo looks familiar but I have no connection or further knowledge of his ministry (if it even is a ministry).
I'd already read that on your blog.
ReplyDeleteIs your larger point that my listed connections doesn't make Trump himself a dominionist by association?
Or that his policies support all of Christianity so we can ignore his influencers, he's just using them to support HIS agenda of making America great?
Perhaps he's more like Cyrus than I envision? Cyrus was not Jewish and did not worship the God of Israel, he was nevertheless portrayed in Isaiah as an instrument of God - and "UNWITTING" conduit through which God effected His divine plan for history. God is sovereign after all --- and has allowed satan to surround Trump with false pastors and wolves --- yet, Trump prevails in spite of them, like the phoenix from ashes and his works are yet God's divine plan.
By that logic -- Obama "effected" His divine plan and you can trust God's plan will also be "effected" by Biden as well. It's why Christian's shouldn't be in so overly concerned with politics and political power and why True Christians need to abandon the "Religious Dominionist Right" in favor of filling both parties with Christians and assuring some Christian agenda is represented by BOTH parties.
Or -- maybe you have another reason for mentioning OPP???
I'm a BIG unfan of guilt by association. I want provable links, such as Trump making a statement that specifically aligns with 7MM.
ReplyDeleteBut, even still, though the 7MM method is clearly a wrong-headed way to 'preach the Gospel', it is certainly better to have those who are not opposed to Judeo-Christian principles on whatever role they are in, as opposed to those who are diametrically opposed to them. And, do you really think the 7MM folks are going to achieve a theocracy?
This reminds of the notion of many Christians who refused to vote for Romney because he was a Mormon.
We elect Presidents on what we perceive of their ability to govern generally and the extent of their alignment with Judeo-Christian values. It doesn't mean we look past their shortcomings in whatever form they may be, and fair criticism is, well, fair. But, at present, for me, given a choice between Biden and Trump, the decision is a no-brainer. YMMV.
For the record, I'm registered Independent. I can't stand partisanship. I'm also well-aware that there are what are termed RINOs. Both parties are largely corrupt in the upper echelons. But there are good folks in both, too.
I only mentioned OPP because he has over 170k subscribers to his vlog, and he takes unfair swipes using poor methods, as I noted above. But people lap it up. "Orange Man Bad" because guilt by association. "Christians" can be absolute worst.
It would be very 'interesting' if eventually enacting some type of 'National Sunday Law' was part of the 7MM agenda.
ReplyDeleteTrump is certainly NOT a dominionist himself. He's an unrepentant adultery and blaspheming heretic who would be put to death in a true theocracy. He's just made the "unwitting" mistake of surrounding himself with these dominionist and taking up their agendas believing that these heretics and the agendas/principles they espouse represent true Christianity.
ReplyDeleteAnd no--- a corrupt tree bears evil fruit. A secular leader is better than a hypocritical heretical blaspheming one pretending to be a Christians and making Christian appear evil.
[actually my wife came up with an example of Trumps demonstrating NAR beliefs. The whole not wearing a mask thing corresponds with a fear of signaling that he lacks faith in God to protect him. He's Cyrus after-all. )
Got Questions sums the 7MM well, calling it "dangerous" and "new age":
"The NAR and proponents of the seven mountain mandate have abandoned biblical teaching on the end times, choosing to believe that Christians must set the stage for Jesus’ second coming by achieving dominion over the world’s systems. According to 7-M theology, Jesus will only return to a world that mirrors the kingdom of God. This idea parallels the New Age teaching that anticipates a cosmic spiritual shift when man becomes a co-redeemer of Planet Earth.
Christians are called to be lights in the world (Matthew 5:14). There is no biblical requirement, however, to take the helm of all the world systems in order to usher in Christ’s kingdom. The Bible says that the world will grow worse, not better, in the last days (2 Timothy 3:1, 13; 2 Peter 3:3).
The theology associated with the seven mountain mandate is dangerous, and it sheds a terribly negative light on Christians everywhere. The 7-M teaching puts a tremendous burden on believers to perform, make progress in their relative spheres of influence, and set the stage for Jesus’ return to earth—all without a definite end point. Little emphasis is placed on the gospel message of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ; the movement is more about staking claims and taking control. The seven mountain mandate is a movement led by false prophets, and it should be avoided and exposed whenever Bible-believing Christians encounter it.
https://www.gotquestions.org/seven-mountain-mandate.html
Thus, if you are a true Christian and consider yourself a part of the heretical Religious Right...repent. Otherwise, you are no different than the everyday black or white person that's out there supporting Black Lives Matter, despite the underlying horrible Marxist agenda they may or may not be aware of. You can't criticize them as a group without assessing the thoughts and beliefs of each and every individual member. This would also hold true for the Gates and Soros guilt by association conspiracy theories here as well
Do I think the 7MM groups are going to achieve a theocracy? Yes. This whole blog is predicated upon that presupposition. Dominionism parallels the New Age. The Dominionist "apostles" have already made great ecumenical strides and inroads with Roman Catholicism. Their brand of charismania is the fastest growing cult in the world and will eventually be a big enough umbrella to incorporate every independent religion as well as the new age practitioners (they already have Christian Astrology, Yoga and Tarot Cards). Eventually -- this "theocracy" will be lead by the Anti-Christ.
The elect ARE being deceived.
Well, the National Sunday Law is a very long-standing conspiracy theory I tend to think these groups will, at first, seek ecumenical reconciliation with all the denominations. Thus, I wouldn't expect a Sunday Law until AFTER the SDA refuses to enlist with the NAR.
ReplyDeleteIt does appear at least one Seventh Day Adventist is raising the alarm about the NAR and dominionism/7MM. It's a pretty good analysis of the movement and even analyzes the trial run of church-state combo they have already undertaken in Uganda.
https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=church-history-pubs
It's interesting that the Anti-Christ is called the LAWLESS one in that:
ReplyDeleteWhat move would it take for many Protestants to (re)join a Mainstream Professing Christianity under the Pope?
The addition of the "faith only" doctrine.
It will be unity (and love) over truth.
ReplyDeletethey will only pull scripture emphasizing unity and any divisiveness will be rebuked, then reprimanded and then punished.
"Love" becomes the focus --- not Jesus. Jesus will offend.
Without Jesus and without scripture there is no law (enter the lawless one - a new jesus that finally everyone can unite around)
To get an idea how these groups and religions can come together... I started with this link regarding Kris Vallotin (Bethel Church) and the pope -
ReplyDeletehttps://churchwatchcentral.com/2019/02/11/kris-vallottons-hero-pope-francis-calls-for-interfaith-harmony/
lead me to this document: "The Human Fraternity: For World Peace and Living Together"
Signed by pope Francis and some imman, Feb. 2019
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana.html
Trump today announce his intention to appoint Sebastian Gorka to National Security Education Board.
ReplyDeletehttps://news.yahoo.com/trump-appoints-far-radio-host-233424005.html
Gorka is another dominionist
https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/919221080945856512
I've posted several summaries of Dominionism but here's one more naming a bunch of its adherents, including Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, etc.
I also like the part where they describe how the dominionist rebrand their agenda as a fight for religious freedom.
https://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/dominionism-rising-theocratic-movement.html
This is getting tiring. What sort of evidence do you have Gorka is a Dominionist? I don't see how that tweet supports such a notion. And the link at the bottom is a piece written by an obvious non-Christian--you can see it in his bio.
ReplyDeleteFactsheet: Sebastian Gorka - Bridge Initiative
ReplyDeletehttps://bridge.georgetown.edu/research/factsheet-sebastian-gorka-2/
That article, from an pro-Islam perspective, only shows Gorka has been outspoken about radical elements in Islam.
ReplyDeleteNext.
NYT 'Chief Threat To Democracy': Eric Weinstein Takes Flamethrower To Paper Of Record After Bari Weiss Quits
ReplyDeleteWhat if those calling for empathy have a specific deadness of empathy?
Those calling for justice *are* the unjust?
Those calling "privilege" are the privileged?
Those calling for equality seek to oppress us?
Those anti-racists are open racists?
The progressive's seek regress?
The journalists are covering up the news?
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/nyt-chief-threat-democracy-eric-weinstein-takes-flamethrower-paper-record-after-bari
Just for the record: The possibility of overthrowing a WESTERN government (by activists of WHATEVER stripe) is NOT as far-fetched a notion as you might've believed!
ReplyDeleteWant proof?
"Harold Wilson was twice-elected Prime Minister of Great Britain and a mild social reformer. According to some sources, he was also an undercover KGB agent tasked with . . . well, no one’s actually sure...
"What’s interesting about this theory is that almost everyone believed it—and this certainly had some bizarre consequences. When a high-ranking Soviet defector claimed the Prime Minister was a Russian stooge, MI5 immediately opened a file on him. By the time 1974 rolled around, the military was so sure he was a traitor that they came within months of staging a coup d’état backed by the freakin’ Royal Family. According to the BBC and the Guardian, army brass planned to seize Heathrow, the BBC and Buckingham Palace and force the Queen to read a speech asking people to support the new military junta.
"Bear in mind that this is Britain, not some banana republic—and these guys were honestly considering the pros and cons of going full General Franco. And all to remove a Prime Minister who resigned for health reasons a few weeks later anyway.
https://listverse.com/2013/04/27/10-plausible-conspiracy-theories
"Retired intelligence officers gathered with military brass and plotted a coup d'etat. They would seize Heathrow airport, the BBC and Buckingham Palace. Lord Mountbatten would be the strongman, acting as interim prime minister. The Queen would read a statement urging the public to support the armed forces, because the government was no longer able to keep order.
"It sounds fantastic, almost comic. But watch Greenwood talk of setting up his own private army in 1974-75. Listen to the former intelligence officer Brian Crozier admit his lobbying of the army, how they "seriously considered the possibility of a military takeover". Watch the archive footage of troop manoeuvres at Heathrow, billed as a routine exercise but about which Wilson was never informed - and which he interpreted as a show of strength, a warning, even a rehearsal for a coup. Listen to the voice of Wilson, who five weeks after resigning summoned two BBC journalists to tell them, secretly, of the plot.
"Much of this has been known for a while; many of those involved have admitted as much and do so again in the BBC film. Yet officially it never happened: a 1987 inquiry under Margaret Thatcher concluded the allegations were false, implying that the fading Wilson had descended into paranoia. This can't be allowed to stand. Not only does it do an injustice to Wilson, it also represents an enormous cover-up. For this was the British Watergate, a conspiracy designed to pervert the democratic choice of the people."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/mar/15/comment.labour1
(Think it can't happen here?)
"These Wall Street Millionaires Literally Plotted To Overthrow The President"
https://timeline.com/business-plot-overthrow-fdr-9a59a012c32a
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/11/08/18628134.php
https://www.counterpunch.org/2011/12/02/wall-streets-failed-1934-coup/
"‘ISRAEL’S ORACLE’ DELIVERS BIG MESSAGE FROM GOD: “MESSIAH IS HERE!”
ReplyDeleteBy Dr. Rivkah Lambert Adler
Breaking Israel News
Jul 9, 2020
I sincerely hope you don't believe anything that kabbalistic website tells you
'Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.'
'For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.'
Did you not read the very beginning of the post? The implication was that this 'Oracle' is a Benjamin Creme type, whom we are all too familiar with!
ReplyDeleteNevertheless your Bible passage is quite correct as far as debunking the "Oracle"'s claim. Well done!
'Well, you all look alike' department:
ReplyDeleteAntifa harass random Asian thinking he's Andy Ngo
An Asian man was confronted and harassed by Black Lives Matter protesters at an antifa riot in Portland on 13 July, 2020, after being mistaken for Andy Ngo.
Anonymous 7:58;
ReplyDeleteYou don't know a thing about Donald Trump's heart or mind, and you don't know anything that he's up to. You only know that you have him all judged and sentenced, just like Shiffe and Nadler, and Pelosi and the New York Times, and CNN and Schumer and the "squad". You dare to call him and unrepentant adulterer? How do you know? You don't. He might have fallen to his knees and begged The Lord to forgive him, just like David did. How do you know? You don't.
Your comments and side comments such as; " This would also hold true for the Gates and Soros guilt by association conspiracy theories here as well", are indicative of a person who knows feels he or she more than everyone else.
There is hubris, and error, in your conclusion that "the elect are being fooled".
How the hell do you know? How do you know who is elect or being fooled? You don't.
If George Soros has given hundreds of millions of dollars to "Occupy" this and that, "Me Too" and "Black Lives Matter", _ and he has most certainly done just that, then it isn't a "conspiracy theory" , it's a conspiracy!
The fact that you don't have enough corage to put a name with your know-it-all comments just tells me that you have little to no faith yourself, so, thanks for the lecture, but no thanks.
"Ephesians 6:12!"
ReplyDeleteI HAVE HAD ENOUGH!!!
Craig (unless you're angry) you're usually more musically inclined. Did you mean to say...
ReplyDeleteModerna COVID-19 Vaccine Induced Adverse Reactions In "More Than Half" Of Trial Participants
ReplyDeletehttps://www.zerohedge.com/political/moderna-covid-19-vaccine-induced-adverse-reactions-more-half-trial-participants
Spirit airline employees injured in brawl over delayed flight in Florida
ReplyDeleteThis is the new normal. Will only get worse in the new lawless U.S.
https://my post.com/2020/07/15/spirit-airline-employees-injured-in-brawl-over-delayed-flight-in-florida
Smart Meters are worse than you think . . .
ReplyDeletehttps://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2020/07/jerry-day-smart-meters-worse-than-you-think-3727704.html
ReplyDeleteWhich side is the Catholic Church on, the Communist BLM/ANTIFA anarchists or the Police Departments in the United States?
According to a recent report, the answer is crystal clear; the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is financially supporting at least 8 radical Marxist groups that are working to "defund police departments" along with the "complete abolition of police departments" in the USA.
We are in the midst of a very real Communist Revolution that is seeking to destroy our nation from within. It is not at all possible that the USCCB is operating INDEPENDENTLY from Rome. Case in point; when the same USCCB attempted to change church policies regarding the crimes of clerical pedophilia, in particular, cooperating with law enforcement, the Vatican stepped in and SHUT DOWN the conference meeting. Some US Bishops expressed shock and dismay at that time, but nevertheless complied. Why? Because Rome is in total control, and what Rome says, goes.
So the bigger question is this: is Rome supporting the overthrow of the Constitutional government of the United States? That may sound like a crazy question, but not when one considers the radical support given to organizations that have a sworn commitment to destroy our current system of government.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/report-shows-us-bishops-supporting-multiple-orgs-that-demand-police-defunding?utm_source=editor_picks&utm_campaign=standard
It may be better as a general rule to leave off extra stuff tagged onto the end of links, so, as an example the one posted above it 'cleans' down to:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.lifesitenews.com/news/report-shows-us-bishops-supporting-multiple-orgs-that-demand-police-defunding
ReplyDeleteA very intelligent, and passionate, true American makes her case to DC Protestors that the BLM movement is hypocritical:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItopNgRQiuY
Here Are the Companies That Support Antifa, Black Lives Matter
ReplyDeleteAshley Rae Goldenberg June 3, 2020
Hi! This is a list of [174] of the “woke” companies that are supporting violent protests across the United States. Despite the chaos, destruction, and deaths, “woke” companies across the country have still come out in support of #BlackLivesMatter, Antifa terrorists, and general criminals.
Please consider using this list to guide in what businesses you wish to support. Please also consider using this list the next time someone makes the argument that we are living in a white supremacist country with institutionalized racism. If major companies consider supporting violent rioters and looters good for their bottom line, your cause isn’t oppressed.
[NOTE: This article was REMOVED from its original platform but thankfully is still to be found here:
https://www.amren.com/news/2020/06/here-are-the-companies-that-support-antifa-black-lives-matter ]
List of 269 Companies Supporting ANTIFA, Black Lives Matter
https://conservativefiringline.com/list-of-269-companies-supporting-antifa-black-lives-matter
Evangelical Leaders Support Black Lives Matter Movement
http://www.christianitydaily.com/articles/9476/20200604/evangelical-leaders-support-black-lives-matter.htm
Where John Piper and Other Evangelicals Stand on Black Lives Matter
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2016/may/where-john-piper-evangelicals-stand-black-lives-matter-blm.html
Why Christians can't support the Black Lives Matter organization
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/why-christians-cant-participate-in-black-lives-matter-org
P.S. "Thankfully" in that suppression of the First Amendment was sidestepped. There is, after all, racism whether there are BLM supporting companies or not. So to say "your cause is not oppressed" because these companies are doing that is overstating things. But, based on the actions by some of them, BLM's 'cause' seems to go beyond simply reducing (if not eliminating) racism, doesn't it? And of course racism can be found against people of ALL colors, not just black!
ReplyDelete"Did you not read the very beginning of the post? The implication was that this 'Oracle' is a Benjamin Creme type, whom we are all too familiar with!"
ReplyDeleteRabbinics and 'oracles' are synonymous, my friend.
1:42 PM
ReplyDeleteDon't be coy, be explicit: WHAT exactly are you trying to say?
THE BEAST IS HERE
ReplyDeleteMust see video . . .
https://shepherdsheart.life/blogs/news/the-beast-is-here
To Anonymous @ 2:58 PM
ReplyDeleteTwo HUGE revelations came from that Celeste Solum article, "The Beast Is Here"...
1) You are getting 'dosed' at the time of testing.
2) "These Nano Bio Robotic weapons are used in conjunction with 5G. They were developed using fallen angel technology and witchcraft which we will see momentarily. They interface as nodes within the BEAST system and the new currency, because once it penetrates your God given barriers a person's DNA changes and becomes one with the BEAST / AI management system."
The mysteries behind Hoover Dam. Is it a possible Stargate portal?
ReplyDeletehttps://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2020/07/will-the-hoover-dam-be-destroyed-confirmed-stargate-portal-for-malicious-use-3727828.html
"Two HUGE revelations came from that Celeste Solum article, "The Beast Is Here"... "
ReplyDeleteUtter tripe. Who is this woman? A female version of Steve Quayle perhaps. I'd rather listen to Deb Tavares all day.
Celeste Solum speaks out about the second wave that is coming . . .
ReplyDeletehttps://beforeitsnews.com/prophecy/2020/07/dave-hodges-celeste-solum-7162020-whats-in-the-second-wave-kill-shot-that-is-coming-to-america-in-the-late-summer-heads-up-2512693.html
For Celeste Solum's background, scroll down to the end of this link...
ReplyDeletehttps://shepherdsheart.life/blogs/news/the-beast-is-here
For what it's worth: FEMA says that it has no record of Celeste Solum ever being an employee.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-covid-testing-blood-harvest-idUSKBN23838E
"BIOGRAPHY: Celeste Solum is an author, and former FEMA employee, who chronicles space and earth conditions that trigger the rise and fall of modern & ancient civilizations, calendars, and volatile economies. She is also a student of biblical prophecy."
ReplyDeletehttps://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/solum-celeste-104494/
Assuming the time is nigh, which one will your friends and loved ones choose?
ReplyDeleteNot One Parousia, But Two
'beforeitsnews' website contains virus/malware software. Beware!
ReplyDeleteLet us vote for the evil of two lessers then.
DID Before It's News Get Hijacked?
ReplyDelete(Read all the comments.)
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread838486/pg1
THE SEVENTH DAY
ReplyDeleteRevelations From The Lost Pages Of History
This five hour documentary traces the history of the Sabbath.
Hosted by award-winning actor Hal Holbrook, the series features more than fifty historians and theologians from around the world. Backed up with careful documentation, "The Seventh Day" is an authoritative presentation of the controversy over Saturday and Sunday as Christian days of worship.
For more information visit:
www.TheSeventhDay.tv
For Sabbath history information visit:
www.SabbathHistory.com
Preview
PART 1
ReplyDeletePART 2
PART 3
PART 4
PART 5
PART 6
ReplyDeletePART 7
PART 8
PART 9
PART 10
PART 11
(Links work now)
ReplyDeleteFor more information visit:
www.TheSeventhDay.tv
For Sabbath history information visit:
www.SabbathHistory.com
ReplyDeleteI didn't check out the "SevennthDay" site, but was wondering if they covered anything regarding the Seventh Day Adventist false prophet Ellen G. White?
ReplyDeleteKeeping the Sabbath was a particular sign for the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL (verse 13, 17). Along with it being a sign, the death penalty was the punishment if any child of Israel "worked" on the Sabbath (verse 15).
If you want to chain people to the OT covenant between God and the children of Israel, you need to be consistent by including God's penalty for working on the Sabbath. You also need to enforce all of the peculiar laws of the OT that were given to the children of Israel.
(Incidentally, Sabbath "breaking" was one of the reasons that the Pharisees were so enraged against Christ. His Disciples "worked" on the Sabbath as evidenced by picking corn, while Jesus often healed on the Sabbath, which the Pharisees considered to be "work").
Numbers 15:32-36)
12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
17 it is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
ReplyDeleteMark 2: 23-28
23 And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.
24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?
25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?
26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?
27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
28Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
No, it's not true that Before It's News has been hijacked!!!
ReplyDeletehttps://beforeitsnews.com/
Not according to Ad Hominem attacks but...
ReplyDeleteAccording to the BIBLE:
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!" Hebrews 4:9b-11 ABPE
"a Sabbath rest"
σαββατισμὸς
(sabbatismos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 4520:
A keeping of the Sabbath
We have seen just here by this single example alone the vital importance to...
Read all of the BIBLE verses on a subject!
Testing Will Begin In Africa For Biometric ID, "Vaccine Records", & "Payment Systems"
ReplyDeletehttps://www.zerohedge.com/markets/testing-will-begin-africa-biometric-id-vaccine-records-payment-systems
Anonymous @ 12:36 PM ....
ReplyDeleteWhy are you limiting your "obedience to the law" only to the keeping of the Sabbath? If you are going to justify yourself by being obedient to the Law, you need to keep the ENTIRE Law, and that includes everything in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Exodus. The fact is, NO ONE can be justified with God by keeping the Law. The Law is a schoolmaster that leads to Christ, because it illustrates the sinful state that every person is in. The ONLY place that peace with God can be found is at the foot of the cross where Christ shed His blood.
Galatians 2:16
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."
Romans 3:20-28
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
I cannot condone her actions, because this is a case of vandalizing something city-sanctioned; but, I do like the fact that she is vocal about her cause.
ReplyDeleteBlack woman VANDALIZED BLM mural at Trump Tower
"you need to be consistent by including God's penalty for working on the Sabbath.
ReplyDelete"You also need to enforce all of the peculiar laws of the OT
you need to keep the ENTIRE Law, and that includes everything in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Exodus
"you need to keep the ENTIRE Law, and that includes everything in Deuteronomy, Leviticus and Exodus."
No, YOU "need" to have a FAR better understanding of what you presume to issue edicts about as evidenced by your repeatedly expressed ignorant statements on the subject.
And as far as "The fact is, NO ONE can be justified with God by keeping the Law.":
"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
The Holy Bible is NOT a book of 'works are necessary' doctrinal statement "magic spells" that you can hurl 'faith only' "counterspells" at and negate them, as you seem to think. ALL of the Bible must be used to formulate doctrine, not SOME of the Bible!
Unless one is intellectually dishonest, that is.
To: All
ReplyDeleteNever forget that Satan himself loves to quote (PART BUT NOT ALL of) the scriptures to "prove" his position on a given topic...
Matthew 4:5-7 NKJV
The Devil took Jesus up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written:
‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’
and,
‘In their hands they shall bear you up,
Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’ ”
Jesus said to him, “It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’ ”
Christine, you wrote:
ReplyDeleteCraig, I didn't say or think JEsus is the same as the Father in a physical way, but that they are alike in every way but distinct persons. There is a prohibition on trying to depict The Father, but it got done two or three times anyway.
you agree with the point about honoring what a flag or other image is about, not the image itself, then I don't see the problem in honoring icons of saints or of Jesus.
God made Jesus His image, so I don't see why we can't make images of Jesus. The earliest images are kind of not that recognizeable except by designation or action, but some time after the images on the Veil of Veronica and shroud that later became known as The Shroud of Turin (C14 dates are compromised by the smoke and mending portions from a fire it survived) then certain specific points develop in art that match these.
Why is there a prohibition on making an image of the Father, but there isn’t one for the Son? Both are YHWH, right? If you argue that we haven’t seen the Father but we have seen the Son, then you cannot appeal to John 14:9: “Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Yet you did just that in your previous comment.
The issue is really quite simple. We are expressly forbidden to make ANY images of God/YHWH. Jesus is God/YHWH. Therefore, we cannot make images of Jesus. It matters not that God made Jesus in His image. God chose to do that, but that scarcely gives us the right to make our own image of this image.
And to be clear, I’m making a specific distinction between icons in a general sense as compared to images (icons) of God/YHWH, i.e., Jesus. I make no comment on the former, but I’m specifically opposed to making images of God—and Jesus is God—for this expressly violates Scripture. This is why I kept bringing up Nestorianism, a heresy of which you are fully aware. That is, you would not argue that we are allowed to make an image of a human Jesus devoid of His Divinity, for this exemplifies the Nestorian heresy; yet you also cannot assert that a Jesus image assumes both humanity and Divinity—thereby bypassing Nestorianism—because this means the icon is God, which is forbidden.
For review let’s look at the RCC Catechism:
2129 The divine injunction included the prohibition of every representation of God by the hand of man. Deuteronomy explains: "Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord [YHWH] spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure...." It is the absolutely transcendent God who revealed himself to Israel. "He is the all," but at the same time "he is greater than all his works."
The Deut reference above is 4:15-16. So, essentially it’s like this: you either accept that the icon is only human, thereby falling into Nestorianism, or you affirm the icon is Divine-human, thereby violating the First Commandment (making images of God/YHWH). There is no escaping this.
ReplyDeleteEphesians 2: 8,9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Titus 3:5-7
5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Romans 9:13-16
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
A person that has, by God's grace and mercy, become a believer in Christ will manifest works of faith which is EVIDENCE of that faith, but in no way does it merit JUSTIFICATION with God. All false religions have one thing in common, and that is this; follow their set of man made rules (that are impossible to perfectly keep) in order to gain "justification" with God, which cannot be accomplished by an man. Justification is a sovereign gift from God that cannot be earned. If you believe, even your faith is a gift, as evidenced by Ephesians 2:8, along with many other verses and passages.
Currently impossible for RayB to comprehend: You cannot EARN Salvation by works but you cannot KEEP Salvation WITHOUT works.
ReplyDeleteHIS way amounts to:
ReplyDelete"Yeah, God, I'll sure do works IF I FEEL LIKE IT!"
Let me add to 11:52 PM above.
ReplyDeleteYou can only define the ‘Persons’ of the Trinity by their intra-Trinitarian relationships. If you delineate too sharply, you imply tritheism, which is obviously heretical. Let me quote RCC theologian Gerald O’Collins (S.J.) at length:
Here the distinction between divine and human persons (and the distinction between divine and human interrelationships) comes into sharp focus. In the case of the tripersonal God, the distinctness of interrelated persons is not constituted by separation of conscious and free subjectivities. A threefold subsistence does not entail three consciousnesses and three wills, as if the three persons, each with their own separate characteristics, constituted a kind of divine committee. One consciousness subsists in a threefold way and is shared by all three persons, albeit by each of them distinctively. It is as if God realizes the dream expressed by the saying about persons very much in love with each other: “They are of one mind and heart.” Unless we accept that all the divine essential or natural properties (like knowing, willing, and acting) are identical and shared in common by the three persons of the Trinity, it is very difficult to see how we can salvage monotheism. Each person must be seen to be identical with the divine nature or the substance [ED: homoousia] of the godhead. Otherwise, the distinction between the three persons will be upheld at the expense of the real divine oneness; the divine unity will be something recognized only after the distinct and even separate constitution of the three persons [ED: i.e., imply tritheism].
How then are the divine relationships crucial and unique? They are just that . (Here the finite model of personhood does call for adjustment.) The three divine persons are mutually distinct only in and through their relations of origin. The internal relations between the three persons form their sole distinguishing feature…[T]he (subsistent) relations account for what differentiates (and unites) the one trinitarian reality (The Tripersonal God: Understanding and Interpreting the Trinity [Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1999], p 178).
Anon @ 12:17 AM ...
ReplyDeleteDo you "work" to keep the Saturday Sabbath or do you "work" to keep the entire Law of the Old Testament?
If you don't keep the entire OT Law, then please explain why you don't and how you are able to arrive at which Laws you accept or reject.
NOTE: I don't expect a truthful answer (because there isn't any).
ReplyDeleteCults always find some means of distinguishing themselves from mainline, orthodox (small o) Christianity. While SDA has a lot of truth on a variety of subjects, they remain chained to the false prophetess *Ellen G. White, along with their legalistic insistence on observing the Old Testament Sabbath mandate which was given specifically to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.
It appears that our Armstrong friend has found a home in the SDA, which isn't surprising, because Armstrong also taught the Saturday Sabbath and insisted that if a person did not observe the OT Sabbath, they could not be saved. Yet, this very same Saturday Sabbath keeper, Herbert W. Armstrong, committed incest against his very own 13 year old daughter. This evil relationship continued on for years! Not surprisingly, Armstrong also uttered countless false prophesies throughout his lifetime.
False prophets and cults go hand in hand.
* Ellen G. White, aka, E. G. White, was a prolific writer that often delved into making prophetic statements, most of which proved to be completely false. Even so, her writings are considered to be on a par with Holy Scripture by many SDA adherents. There is a faction of the SDA that does not hold to this view, but, at the same time, they do not reject E. G. White as a "false prophetess," while maintaining that there is great value to be gained by studying her writings. If you follow ANY SDA teachings, you will soon see and hear references to the name "E. G. White." In other words, E. G. White and SDA cannot be separated.
This guy, Angel Quiroz, gets it! He's well-spoke and well-acquainted with the associated issues, and how "social justice" and Cultural Marxism have infiltrated the
ReplyDelete'church':
I'm Tired Of Woke Christianity #WalkAway
After getting such great feedback on my Why I Left The Left video, I decided to talk a bit about the way Leftism has been infiltrating the Christian Church. As a believing Christian who is plugged into my church community, I have seen first hand how the lies of BLM and other lefist organization have poisoned the well of critical thinking. Let me know what I should talk about next!
To: All
ReplyDeleteI hardly need point out the usage of the favorite method of the intellectually dishonest:
IGNORE/SIDESTEP that which you can't DIRECTLY rebut...
"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
...and DEFLECT by cluttering up the topic and distracting with unproven assertions and top it off with attacks...
Ad Hominem
Attacking a person's character or motivations rather than a position or argument.
adj. Appealing to the emotions rather than to logic or reason.
n. To the man; to the interests or passions of the person.
P.S. Here's apparently a profound revelation for you, RayB:
KEEP GOD'S DAYS, ETC. WITHOUT ACCEPTING FALSE PROPHECIES OR RAPING YOUR DAUGHTER.
ReplyDeleteRayB said to Anon @ 12:17 AM ...
Do you "work" to keep the Saturday Sabbath or do you "work" to keep the entire Law of the Old Testament?
If you don't keep the entire OT Law, then please explain why you don't and how you are able to arrive at which Laws you accept or reject.
NOTE: simple questions that require an answer, why don't you provide a definitive answer??
P.P.S. Correction:
ReplyDeleteIGNORE/SIDESTEP that which you can't DIRECTLY rebut...
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!" Hebrews 4:9b-11 ABPE
"a Sabbath rest"
σαββατισμὸς
(sabbatismos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 4520:
A keeping of the Sabbath
"You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
"The saints...are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus."
Rev. 14:12 NKJV
I apologize for the great length of this (and this will conclude my responses to the topic) but although I wouldn't normally respond thus to an intellectually dishonest debater (waste of time) there are undoubtedly others who are now legitimately interested in the answer.
ReplyDeleteSo be it.
Which Old Testament LAWS should we keep today?
The basic principles explaining which laws are still in force. Here is how you can know which laws in the Old Testament were changed or abolished, and which we are commanded to observe today!
“How can I know the difference between the added ceremonial laws and the spiritual laws which we are to observe today?”
This question is absolutely BASIC.
Everyone of you needs to understand in detail the answer to this question. Your Christian growth-your very character- depends on your knowledge of this question.
The entire Bible was written to illustrate the lives of individuals who have kept the spiritual laws God set in motion. We need to study their example.
New Testament Teaching
Notice, first of all, the New Testament teaching.
Jesus-the living Head of our Church ---told the disciples: “Whoso therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoso shall Do and TEACH them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5 : 19).
How important it is that we-the disciples of Jesus today-become familiar with the least commandments-that we live by every word of God.
Bible Is Final AUTHORITY
True Christianity differs from all other 'versions' in that it takes the Bible as ABSOLUTE and FINAL AUTHORITY.
No one can gain entrance into God’s Kingdom unless that individual first recognizes the authority and rule of God.
We are not to argue with God or use human reason to evade the plain commands of Scripture. God is Supreme Lawgiver. He knows what is best for us. He has perfect wisdom and understanding. We can place our confidence in Him and rely on His judgment which He committed to writing for us-in the Bible.
The tendency is to use human reason to side-step what seems of lesser importance to us. It is so very easy for us to say: “I don’t see why God would want us to keep this. It seems so impractical in this modern age. Now here is the way I see it.”
This attitude is exactly what makes other churches carnal and worldly-of the devil. They use their human reason instead of accepting the BIBLE as FINAL AUTHORITY.
Some of you have been negligent in your study of God’s laws. You have forgotten the admonition: “Lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul. . . . And ye shall teach them [to] your children, talking of them, when you sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up” (Deut. 11: 18-19).
ReplyDeleteThis is for us today!
So let us all open our minds and come to a new understanding of pure, true Christianity.
Ten Commandments Binding at Creation
Christians should recognize the eternal binding authority of the Ten Commandments. David was inspired to say: “All His commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness” (Ps. 110:7-8). Jesus didn’t abolish the Ten Commandments. “Think not,” He said, “that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill.” (i.e. to EXEMPLIFY!)
We must follow His example today and fulfill the law. We must believe the prophets, too-and obey God as they commanded us.
The Ten Commandments constitute the basic spiritual law which regulates human life. It is “holy, just and good,” said Paul in Romans 7: 12 and 14.
First, remember that God’s basic spiritual laws existed from the beginning. When speaking of divorce, Jesus said that “from the beginning it was not so” (Matt. 19: 8). It was a sin at the beginning of this present creation to commit adultery!
The world strayed so far from the truth that, by the days of Moses, God had to reveal His law anew to the Israelites. Israel had lost a knowledge of God’s ways while in Egyptian bondage. Let us notice, however, that God was merely revealing the laws which were already in force. The old covenant did not establish the spiritual laws.
In Exodus 16:28 we read that the Eternal, when speaking about Israel to Moses, said: “How long do you refuse to keep my commandments and my laws?”
Israel could not refuse what did not exist! Now turn to Exodus 18:16. Moses told his father-in-law that when the people have a dispute, “I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.”
Other Laws Based on Ten Commandments
Notice! Here are the statutes and laws of God existing BEFORE the old covenant. As they existed before the old covenant, they could not be abolished when it ceased to exist. The old covenant could not destroy what it did not bring into force. The old covenant was merely an AGREEMENT to keep these laws which were already in force!
Notice how the statutes and laws of God magnify the Ten Commandments: God forbids us to eat unclean meats. To lust after what He forbids is to covet. One of the Ten Commandments says: “Thou shalt NOT covet.”
Notice also that God’s law made provision for judgments to be established over the centuries. (See Numbers 27: 11 for example.) The judgments are binding decisions based on God’s previously revealed law.
But when did the carnal ceremonies and sacrifices of the Levitical priesthood begin? And how can we distinguish them from the statutes and laws that existed prior to the old covenant?
ReplyDeleteWhen Did Sacrificial Laws Begin?
When God brought Israel to the foot of Mt. Sinai, He gave the Ten Commandments to them. He allowed Moses to declare all the statutes and judgments to Israel (Exodus, chapters 20-24). These statutes and judgments MAGNIFY the Ten Commandments.
Now notice carefully. There is only one sacrifice mentioned in the book of the law-the passover sacrifice (Exodus 23 : 18). God called it “MY sacrifice.” Next, turn to Jeremiah 7:22-23. Listen to what the Eternal inspired Jeremiah to write: “For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I DID NOT SPEAK . . . OR COMMAND them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this COMMAND I GAVE THEM: ‘Obey my voice . . . and walk in ALL THAT WAY THAT I COMMAND YOU, that it may be well with you.’ ”
God did not command these sacrifices to be offered originally. This explains why none of those temporary sacrifices were perpetuated by different symbols in the New Testament Church. ONLY THE SYMBOLS TODAY-because it began before the old covenant was made. (See its institution in Exodus 12 before the Israelites left Egypt.)
The very fact that Jesus substituted unleavened bread and wine for the passover lamb only, and not for the temporary offerings, is absolute proof that the ceremonial old testament offerings are not binding today!-but that the passover is binding! Paul says (Gal. 3: 19) these temporary rituals and sacrifices were “added because of transgression” -because God’s spiritual law was being broken-until Christ should come. They foreshadowed the sacrifices of Christ and were a “reminder of sin” to teach thc people the need of the Messiah who would pay the penalty of human transgression (Hebrews 10:3).
Notice that these temporary laws did not define sin. They were reminders of sin. God’s spiritual laws define sin. The laws which define sin-which explain what sin is-these laws we are to keep today.
Sacrifices FOREVER?
Consider for a moment the New Testament instructions about sacrifices.
Today we have spiritual offerings and sacrifices: “Ye . . . are being built unto a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ,” wrote Peter. (See I Peter 2:5 and 9.) We are to “present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, well-pleasing to God, your spiritual service” (Romans 12:1).
It is a spiritual principle to offer oneself in living obedience-to sacrifice the self-to God. God Almighty is worthy to receive such service from us.
The principle of offering sacrifices existed before Moses. Christ volunteered to offer Himself from the beginning to pay for the sins of mankind. In the period from Moses to Christ the practice of giving offerings was reduced to a physical plane. The children of Israel were a physical, carnal people without the promise of the Holy Spirit. They could not offer themselves in spiritual obedience to God (Deut. 29:4), so they performed ritualistic washings and offered animals and other physical types instead.
ReplyDeleteThey also needed to be reminded of Jesus’ sacrifice, so God gave them physical types in the “law of Moses,” “until the seed should come.” But remember, the spiritual sacrifices of which those in the law of Moses were merely temporary types-are still to be offered up by us today!
“But,” many ask, “weren’t the Levitical sacrifices ordained forever?” Yes, the Bible does say that the Levitical priesthood and its sacrifices were to be perpetual or forever. But let us understand the real significance of the Hebrew word translated “forever.” It means continuous, so long as the factors involved exist.
Notice three scriptures where this meaning is made plain. Men could be the slaves of a master forever-meaning till the death of one of the parties. (See Exodus 21:6; Lev. 25:46; Deut. 15:17.)
What are the factors which may limit the offering of sacrifices? One, the need of a physical, human priesthood. Two, the need for sacrifices.
Now consider the following:
What is the purpose of a priesthood? To offer sacrifices and to act on behalf of men in relation to God (Hebrews 5:1 and 8:3). But how long do offerings as reminders of sin need to be made? Paul tells us: “Now where remission of [sins) is, there is no more offering for sin” (Hebrews 10: 18).
To offer sacrifices as reminders of sins already paid for by Jesus, who gave His life in full payment for all sins, is needless. Moreover, SINCE THE HOLY SPIRIT HAS ALSO BEEN MADE AVAILABLE, PHYSICAL OFFERINGS AND VARIOUS WASHINGS WHICH ARE TYPES OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ARE NO LONGER NEEDED. HENCE THE PHYSICAL LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD IS NO LONGER NECESSARY- the old testament washings and offerings are no longer binding. The factors involved in the law of Moses ceased to exist.
God ALONE Changes Laws
Perhaps we have failed to realize that God ALONE has the right to add and change or alter carnal or fleshly laws.
The carnal laws were subject to change because they were only types of the promised seed, Christ, who should take upon Himself the sins of the world. When the circumstances were altered, the obligation to practice the carnal laws ceased.
But what about the spiritual laws?
GOD WILL NOT ALTER HIS SPIRITUAL LAWS. The spiritual laws describe the very character of God. They enable us to know what God is like. Since the character of God remains unchanging-“I change not, saith the Eternal” (Mal. 3:6 ) and “Jesus, the same yesterday, today, and forever” ( Heb. 13 : 8) -the spiritual laws could not change.
Now let us notice where we can find exactly what constituted the temporary laws. Turn with me to Hebrews 9:9-10.
Carnal Laws Distinguished from Others
ReplyDeleteIn these two verses we read of the material gifts and sacrifices which included “ONLY meats and drinks and diverse washings -carnal ordinances, imposed until the time of reformation.”
Notice that the temporary laws did not pertain to murder or theft or sabbath- breaking, but were ONLY those ordinances regulating meat and drink offerings and different washings or ablutions of the unclean. These external washings were a type of the Holy Spirit cleaning us up within.
ANY OTHER LAWS NOT INCLUDED IN HEBREWS 9:10 WERE NOT PART OF THE RITUALS ADDED BECAUSE OF SIN!
Remember this point!
It will help you to know which rites in the old testament were added to the statutes and judgments already in existence.
What Is the Law of Moses?
Some people are easily confused by the trick statement that the Ten Commandments are the law of Moses. They turn to Luke 2:22-24 in which the ceremonies of the “law of Moses” are also called part of the “law of the Lord.”
Why is the “law of Moses” also called the “law of the Lord”?
Because all law comes from God! Moses is not the lawmaker! He merely told the people the laws that God set in motion (John 1: 17).
The law of Moses is NEVER called the Ten Commandments. It comprises only statutes and judgments which God gave him to communicate to the people. The difference between the law of Moses and the Ten Commandments is that God spoke the ten words, but Moses delivered the statutes and judgments.
Now, let us recall that when Moses first delivered the statutes and judgments, the law of Moses had no sacrifices connected with it. Jeremiah said so! (Jer. 7:22).
The law of Moses was originally the civil law, based on the principles of the Ten Commandments. These civil statutes and judgments are right and good (Psalm 119:7,8).
But after the close of the old covenant (Ex. 24) , the Levitical priesthood was established and the laws regulating offerings were added (Exodus 28: 1 ). (Prior to this time offerings were voluntary and young men were priests-Exodus 24: 5.)
Therefore the law of Moses has more than one part! Notice God’s definition of the original part of that law in Malachi 4:4: “Remember the law of my servant Moses, the statutes and judgments that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel.”
This law we are not to forget. We are to keep it!
BUT ADDED TO THIS LAW LATER WERE OTHER STATUTES REGULATING MATERIAL RITUALS, SUCH AS SACRIFICES, CENSE, AND VARIOUS WASHINGS FOR THE UNCLEAN.
ReplyDeleteThis almost unnoticed fact is what causes so much difficulty in understanding that the LAW OF MOSES WAS COMPOSED OF two DISTINCT PARTS: THE CIVIL AND THE RITUALISTIC!
Part of Law of Moses Still in Force!
Jesus said the two great commandments were love to God and love to neighbor. Do you know from where He quoted these laws?
Out of the book of the law!-the laws that Moses spoke to the people. Read it in Leviticus 19:18: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” And Deuteronomy 6.4. “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.”
In II John 5 and 6, God commands Christians to obey these two basic laws which He communicated to the people by Moses! In I1 Kings 23:25, Josiah is praised because he “turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF MOSES!
Notice how plain it is. The civil law of Moses expounds the Ten Commandments by revealing how the ten basic principles are to be applied. We are to keep this part of the law, not in the strictness of the letter, but according to its spirit and intent.
Added Part NO LONGER in Force
Then why do we read in Acts that Gentile converts do not have to observe the “law of Moses,” except for four points? (Acts 15.) The answer is made plain in Acts 21:21.
The laws of Moses called in question involved “customs.” Read it for yourself. The Jews were falsely accusing Paul, saying that he taught Jews living abroad “not to circumcise their children or observe the CUSTOMS!” (Acts 21:21.)
The controversy in the early Church did not involve the civil law of Moses. It involved only the ceremonial additions to the original civil law of Moses -only customs-ADDED ceremonies or rituals.
This is further proven by noticing the four points, included in the law added by Moses, which are binding on all Christians everywhere. We are not to eat blood, animals which are strangled, meats offered to idols or to practice fornication. These four points were originally part of the civil law of Moses.
They were also included later with the added ceremonies to regulate the typical sacrifices. The Gentiles ate their sacrifices with the blood, often strangled their animals, and presented them to idols. They also committed fornication in their religious ceremonies. To prevent these pagan customs being practised by Israel, God included the four civil laws along with the rituals. (See Lev. 17:7 and 10; Numbers 2 5 : 1- 3 .)
When the ceremonies were declared no longer binding (in Acts 15), these four points had to be declared binding because some would have thought they were abolished along with the temporary rituals. But since these four points were part of the civil law before the addition of the rituals, they remained binding after the abolition of the physical sacrifices and washings!
How plain! Only the ceremonial customs of the law of Moses have passed away.
The civil law of Moses which defined sin was not called in question, was not involved.
The many civil laws regulating tithing, clean and unclean meats, the annual sabbaths, and many others are still for the New Testament Church because they explain what sin is. They were not part of the ceremonial law of Moses mentioned in Hebrews 9:10 and abolished in Acts 15. The civil principles of the law of Moses were a separate law and not part of the added “law of Moses” which is no longer in force.
ReplyDeleteMinistration of Death
Now let us consider the use of the death penalty in old testament times.
A common question often asked is this: Why do we not enforce the death penalty for sabbath-breakers or for any other violation of the Ten Commandments?
The answer to this question is found in Matthew 5. Let us turn to this important chapter again. Jesus was anticipating doubts in the minds of the disciples. He commences by saying He came to keep the law, not to destroy it. Then He proceeds to CHANGE the APPLICATION of the civil laws as they were given to ancient Israel. He magnifies them and makes them honorable. He raises them from narrow, national laws -given to a carnal nation to be administered according to the strict letter to a spiritual plane regulating the whole of human society. Six times Jesus says: “You have heard it said in olden times. . . But I say to you. . . .” and He then proceeds to expound the spiritual principles underlying the civil laws of Moses.
In particular, notice Matthew 5 : 38; “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. . . .”
Civil Law Restored to Perfection
Jesus RESTORED THESE SPIRITUAL LAWS as they were from the beginning. But why was Moses commanded to give them only in the letter to ancient Israel?
Ancient Israel was not like the Church today. It was a national church--a carnal nation organized into the congregation of Israel. They did not have the promise of the Holy Spirit; they were a nation of this world. Moses said that they did not even have the power or strength of will to keep what little he commanded them (Deut. 5:29).
And neither do human beings today! People don’t want to obey the commandments. “The carnal mind is enmity against God: fur it is not subject to the law of God’ (Rom. 8:7). Israel needed punishments for lawbreakers to keep peace and security in the land. Therefore God allowed human judges to take His divine prerogatives and to execute punishments on their fellow men.
Jesus gave the civil law to Moses in the strict letter at Mount Sinai for a physical church. Fifteen centuries later Jesus restored the spirit of the law for the spiritual Church.
Jesus came to make it possible for us to be forgiven and to have the very nature of God acting in us. Therefore He restored the civil law to its original spiritual perfection.
So to conclude...
It behooves each of us, individually, to reconcile our beliefs and practices with the Bible as best we can because:
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!” (1 John 2:3-4).
Anon 11:58 PM,
ReplyDeleteNah, not at all. But, if I were really angry at something, I'd more likely play something like this:
THE WHO - I've Had Enough | QUADROPHENIA
ReplyDeleteTo Armstrong Anonymous:
At least make an attempt to be honest. YOU did not write the above posts. YOU copied and pasted the material and didn't give credit to the original writer.
My suspicion is that you copied and pasted directly from a UCG (Armstrong) writer. Why do I say that? Because it follows the typical Armstrong view on obedience to the OT Law.
Post the link from which you copied and pasted this Armstrong propaganda from.
PS: When I have time, I'll be posting details about the origins, beliefs and practices of SDA, along with revealing information on E. G. White, SDA's False Prophet.
Of course I didn't write (most) of it, Sherlock. I had (& have) NO intention of indulging you in your little game of "Can't Rebut The Article? Attack The Author!" Find someone else to play Ad Hominem with.
ReplyDelete(Notice folks: RayB DIDN'T EVEN TRY to rebut the ARTICLE itself! That should tell you all you need to know.)
RayB, you’re doing a good job, but like you said, there’s no reason to expect an answer out of this.
ReplyDeleteThe question is simple Anon, you refuse to give a straight simple answer.
You say we need to study and follow the entire law, the 613 mitzvot I assume you mean.
Do you follow them all? It was nearly impossible in the OT days, and is impossible now. Which is why Jesus’s sacrifice freed us from it, he fulfilled the debt.
If you want to continue dodging this simple question, it’s ok, I already know you don’t follow them all. I’ve had to deal with Messianic Jew/Hebrew Roots people who talk the same game. What traditional Christians would like is for people like you to make sense and to stop lying.
Well folks, looks like I really touched a nerve, doesn't it? Haha! First RayB asks me for my response TWICE, 2nd time ending with "why don't you provide a definitive answer??" And when I GIVE him an EXTREMELY definitive answer he flips out, demanding to know just WHO the article's author is (so, of course, that he can at LEAST launch an Ad Hominem attack).
ReplyDeleteThen this 'Reuben G.' character suddenly pops up out of nowhere, claiming that I said that we need to study and follow the entire law when that was what RAYB SAID IN HIS 'EDICT'! And has the incredible Chutzpah to say that I avoided RayB's question. And BOTH Ray AND Reuben attacked my integrity! Dear me! LOL!
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SIMPLY NOTICE HOW NEITHER ONE OF THEM ADDRESSES THE CRYSTAL CLEAR QUOTES OF THE BIBLE STATING IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT WORKS ARE NECESSARY AND THAT THE SABBATH IS STILL TO BE OBSERVED. ALL THEY DO INSTEAD IS DISTRACT, DISTRACT, DISTRACT FROM THOSE DEADLY-TO-THEIR-CAUSE BIBLE VERSES!
Federal Judge Esther Salas--the first Latina to sit on this bench--just had her home 'hit' by a man posing as a FedEx deliveryman. She wasn't not there at the time, but the imposter shot and killed killed her son who had opened the door, and shot her husband multiple times. Her husband is in critical condition, though still alive.
ReplyDeleteHere's the important part: U.S. District Judge Esther Salas is presiding over the Deutsche Bank/Jeffrey Epstein civil case after it was assigned to her 4 days ago.
Esther Salas’ Jeffrey Epstein Case Ties Explained
New Jersey Federal Judge Esther Salas, whose son and husband were shot on July 19 in their home, was recently assigned to a case linked to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Bloomberg reported on July 16 that Deutsche Bank AG is accused of misleading investors “about anti-money-laundering deficiencies” as well as failing to “properly monitor” customers that are “high-risk,” including Epstein.
Federal judge's son killed, husband injured in shooting at New Jersey home
Eyewitness News ABC7NY
The son of New Jersey federal judge Esther Salas was killed, and her husband was injured in a shooting at their home.
ReplyDeleteTo our Armstrong Anonymous friend:
Why haven't you provided us with WHO the author is that wrote your lengthy copy & paste post?
What is it that you are attempting to hide?
I also noticed that YOU did not answer my simple, direct questions as stated again here:
"Do you "work" to keep the Saturday Sabbath or do you "work" to keep the entire Law of the Old Testament?"
"If you don't keep the entire OT Law, then please explain why you don't and how you are able to arrive at which Laws you accept or reject."
"Why haven't you provided us with WHO the author is that wrote your lengthy copy & paste post?"
ReplyDeleteALREADY ANSWERED.
"I also noticed that YOU did not answer my simple, direct questions as stated again here:
"Do you 'work' to keep the Saturday Sabbath or do you 'work' to keep the entire Law of the Old Testament?"
IDIOTICALLY PHRASED QUESTION.
"If you don't keep the entire OT Law, then please explain why you don't and how you are able to arrive at which Laws you accept or reject."
ALREADY ANSWERED.
Don't bother asking any more.
ReplyDeleteYou claim that you "already answered" who it was that wrote your copy & paste post, yet, you haven't provided us with who the author is.
Again, what are you trying to hide?
WHO WAS THE AUTHOR ???
Isn't it amazing that a very lengthy series of posts defacto inherently EXPLAINING "THAT I don't and WHY I don't keep the entire Old Testament laws and HOW I'm able to arrive at which Laws to accept or reject." let alone my clear answer explaining why I didn't mention the article's author are TOTALLY IGNORED!
ReplyDeleteBut RayB thinks he's being ever so coyly clever.
Truly pathetic.
Look at this, RayB seemingly can't even understand his OWN questions, LOL!
ReplyDeleteHE CHANGES THIS:
"Why haven't you provided us with WHO the author is that wrote your lengthy copy & paste post?"
TO MEANING THIS:
"You claim that you 'already answered' who it was that wrote your copy & paste post"
A message to Esther Salas from the SEE EYE AYY.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteSimple question that Anonymous Armstrong refuses to answer:
WHO is the the AUTHOR of your copy & paste posts?
Why won't he give us the name of the author along with a link to the article? Because it comes straight from the Armstrong cult, that's why.
If nothing else, this serves as an educational illustration as to how members of cults operate; they want to rope you in and enslave you into their cult by using lies and deceit.
Please tip your waitress, RayB is appearing nightly. -And thank you for coming to The Comedy Barn Nightclub!
ReplyDeleteCheck out the info in this vlog, substituting "planned" for "predicted", and you can see one guy's views--supported by a book--on how/why things are going the way they are presently:
ReplyDeleteThe Fourth Turning - How this crisis was predicted 30 years ago
Ray...
ReplyDeleteThe copied quotes by our cult friend trace straight back to the Herbert Armstrong Good News Magazine:
Authored by: Herman L. Hoeh
https://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/mobile/m_hwa.cgi?action=getmagazine&InfoID=1384174042
As I said: I had (& have) NO intention of indulging RayB in his little game of "Can't Rebut The Article? Attack The Author!" HE can find someone else to play Ad Hominem with.
ReplyDelete(Notice folks: RayB STILL DIDN'T EVEN TRY to rebut the ARTICLE itself! That ALONE should tell you all you need to know.)
AND FOR GOOD MEASURE NOTICE HOW NONE OF THEM ADDRESSES THE CRYSTAL CLEAR QUOTES OF THE BIBLE STATING IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT WORKS ARE NECESSARY AND THAT THE SABBATH IS STILL TO BE OBSERVED. ALL THEY CAN DO INSTEAD IS DISTRACT, DISTRACT, DISTRACT FROM THOSE DEADLY-TO-THEIR-CAUSE BIBLE VERSES!
BUT now to the HILARIOUS part:
RayB stated "Why won't he give us the name of the author along with a link to the article? Because it comes straight from the Armstrong cult, that's why.
"If nothing else, this serves as an educational illustration as to how members of cults operate; they want to rope you in and enslave you into their cult"
Only ONE PROBLEM with THAT BRILLIANT ANALYSIS:
IT'D BE REALLY HARD TO, UH, 'ROPE YOU IN' AND 'ENSLAVE' YOU...(i.e. get a far better understanding of Biblical topics in general than RayB offers)...
IF YOU WERE NEVER TOLD WHERE TO GO TO GET MORE INFORMATION!
THANKS FOR THE LINK!
LMAO!!!
To Anonymous @ 12:22 PM ...
ReplyDeleteGood work in finding the link to the Armstrong cult's site that contained the article.
What a shock ! You could have knocked me over with a feather. LOL !
Ron Paul: Big holes in the Covid spike narrative
ReplyDeleteMotorcycle accidents ruled Covid deaths? In the rush to paint Florida as the epicenter of the “second wave” of the coronavirus outbreak, government officials and their allies in the mainstream media have stooped to ridiculous depths to maximize the death count. A television station this weekend looked into two highly unusual Covid deaths among victims in their 20s, and when they asked about co-morbidities they were told one victim had none, because his Covid death came in the form of a fatal motorcycle accident.
Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. In fact the “spike” that has dominated the mainstream for the last couple of weeks is full of examples of such trickery.
Washington state last week revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed that anyone who passed away for any reason whatsoever who also had coronavirus was listed as a “Covid-19 death” even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19.
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/july/20/big-holes-in-the-covid-spike-narrative/
The great Covid-19 deception and what you need to know to survive . . .
ReplyDeletehttp://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/july/10/the-great-covid-19-deception-and-what-you-need-to-know-to-survive/
Thanks to anonymous for the entire full length book posted in the comments section of Constance's blog.
ReplyDeleteI didn't read one word of it... Okay I read a couple paragraphs and then I realized that it was an entire thesis, cut and pasted here.
I understand that it was some kind of rebuttal to something that Ray B said, or something like that?
If you want people to read a book that you like, why not just recommend it to everyone?
Did you win the argument? I don't care.
Did anyone actually read that ?
Wearing masks: A sledgehammer to health . . .
ReplyDeleteDr. Mark Sircus, in an article published on Lew Rockwell, July 10, 2020 titled: Wearing Masks-A Sledgehammer to Health reveals a startling statistic. He notes that typical CO2 in the air is about 400 ppm, a little higher than that around the nose or mouth as we breathe. But a typical mask can drive the level up to a dangerous 5,000 ppm!
According to Dr. Sircus the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has determined that the minimum oxygen concentration in the air we breathe should be no less than 19.5 percent. Most of what we breathe in the atmosphere at sea level is nitrogen gas, approximately 78 percent.
But wearing a face mask has been shown to reduce the amount of oxygen in the blood stream to 17.5 percent which over time can lead to hypoxia or lack of adequate oxygen to function normally. Headaches, foggy thinking and lethargy are common byproducts. Mask wearing while engaging in heightened physical activity can make matters even worse.
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/july/13/citizens-forced-to-breathe-deadly-climate-change-gas/
5:16 PM
ReplyDeleteNew from Millennial Millie. But wait, Chris Wallace read the entire document and didn't find anything about "defund the police". That's because he didn't know the lingo:
ReplyDeleteBiden Task Force Wants To Abolish The Police
ReplyDeleteExcellent presentation by Dr. Phil Johnson of Grace Community Church entitled:
Seventh-day Adventist: What Do They Really Believe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCX6zTYwGTs
Video: The Sabbath Debate with Doug Batchelor and Steve Gregg
ReplyDeleteArmstrong anon,
ReplyDeleteNo one is responding to any “answers” in the cut and paste article because no one read it! Say your answer concisely in your own words.
2 simple questions still stand unanswered.
Remember, in the Didache it was written:
But every Lord's day [kata kuriak·n de kuriou] gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations. (Didache, chap. 14)
Those people were around just a few years before Armstrong, the Adventists, and all the other kooks.
Acts of the Apostles 20:7 says:
And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow: and he continued his speech until midnight.
When they say gathered to break bread, he ain’t talkin about a party with hummus and pitas.
Just a few tidbits of information that I was able to gather from a variety of sources:
ReplyDeleteArmstrongism, Jehovah Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventism, all have their roots firmly planted in the same soil of the heretical sect known as "Millerism," a religious movement founded by a heretical preacher in the 19th. Century by the name of William Miller. Consistent with the spirit of the day, Miller concentrated much of his studies focused upon end times prophesies. A farmer by trade and part-time "Baptist" preacher, Miller took it upon himself to study, and interpret, the meaning of Daniel Chapter 8. Miller claimed to have received a "revelation" of the EXACT date of Christ's return to earth; October 22, 1844. Miller also developed an number of other heretical doctrines which survive to this day. Among Miller's vast number of followers were James & Ellen G. White. Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Jehovah Witnesses and another failed "date setter," was also heavily influenced by the teachings of William Miller.
Miller's followers (just as false "date setter" Harold Camping's followers) gave away their "earthly belongings" and anxiously waited for the 2nd. Coming. When the event did not occur (known as "The Great Disappointment"), many left the movement and splintered into other groups that were formed. James & E. G. White temporarily remained and attempted to explain that the "date was correct, but the 'event' was misinterpreted." Ellen White developed the theory that on the 1844 date, Christ "entered into the Holy of Holies in order to further work upon the cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary." Ellen White also proclaimed that the 10/22/1844 date signified the "closing of redemption," meaning that no one could be saved after that date. The Whites eventually founded the Seventh Day Adventist movement and held to this heresy until it was quietly rejected in 1851.
Ellen White considered herself a prophet that had visions from God and visitations from angels, from which she was able to provide "truth to her little flock." White was a prolific writer (her husband owned a publishing company) and authored "at least 16 books," with her earliest appearing in print 1844, in which she enumerated a number of prophesies, virtually all of which failed. In 1882, recognizing this problem, SDA moved to redact her failed prophesies from reprints, while falsely proclaiming that these reprinted publications were FIRST EDITIONS.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteE. G. White's teachings, still followed by SDA today, contained numerous heresies. Here are just a few; White proclaimed that "when a person dies, they no longer exist," that "Hell is not eternal," that "there is no such thing as eternal security," that "keeping the OT Saturday Sabbath was God's GREATEST COMMANDMENT and was paramount to one's salvation," that "Jesus was a created being who was manifested as Michael the Archangel," and (among others) that "Satan would bear our sins."
Ellen White was also apparently a "holy fashion designer." In 1867, she came up with the design of a hideous black dress that was "shorter" than the custom of the day and also made women look ridiculously fat. She claimed that she received her design via a vision from "god." She claimed that women and girls that did not adhere to her "dress doctrine" risked losing their salvation." White fanatically held to this unpopular "vision from god" for eight years, and then suddenly ended her soul-threatening doctrine.
To this day, Seventh Day Adventist doctrine, while claiming to "believe in the Trinity," also claim that Jesus was Michael the Archangel, making Him a created being. (Jehovah Witnesses, while denying the Trinity, also claim that Jesus was Michael the Archangel. Armstrongism denies the Trinity, claiming that the Holy Spirit is not a member of the Trinity, but only a "spirit.)
ReplyDeleteWhat does the Bible claim about the "Trinity?"
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." 1 John 5:7
Was Jesus EVER Michael the Archangel?
Hebrews Chapter 1:
5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
6 And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
NOTE: Verse 8 is a fulfillment of the prophecy that names Christ God from Psalms 45:6, which reads "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre." When Jehovah Witnesses knock on your door, ask them to interpret this verse ... then take them to the Hebrews 1:8 verse which clearly declares Jesus as the "O God" in Psalms 45:8.
Will that convince them? No. But at least it might plant a seed ! I always encourage them to read the Bible on their own, without notes or comments (they typically claim they do, but are under disciplinary penalty from their hierarchy if found to be doing so).
No, no, no... Jesus was NEVER Michael the Archangel. How can anyone with a brain even think such a thing??? That sounds like some new age 'mumbo jumbo' attempting to diminish the divinity of Jesus... and His role as Savior of the world. Comments such as these should be highly offensive to every Christian.
ReplyDeleteBottom line: Angels are not now, and never have been, DIVINE!!!
ReplyDeletehttps://orthodoxwiki.org/Seventh_Ecumenical_Council
ReplyDeleteCraig, we are forbidden to make an image of The Father apparently or to make images that we worship as things in themselves as distinct from relative veneration of God or saints they represent, GOD HAS MADE HIS OWN IMAGE WHICH IS JESUS and we can make images of that image.
THE USE OF ICONS OF CHRIST IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE INCARNATION, OF THE GOODNESS OF THE PHYSICAL CREATION, ITS EVENTUAL RESTORATION TO GOODNESS FROM FALLENNESS.
as for sabbath keeping, Colossians chapter 2 discusses all this as precursors to Jesus pointing to Him, but now the reality has come, THEREFORE vs. 1`6 is against keepng the mosaic indicator specifics the sabbath included and not let ourselves be judged for not doing so.
An early council cited in a post discussed those who chose to keep the sabbath and did so on Saturday and judaizing risks reverting to judaism so even the two fast days a week were changed to Wednesday and Friday mourning the conspiracy against Christ and the suffering He underwent for us. Sunday is not the sabbath true but was recommended to be treated as such by those intent on keeping the sabbath.
Constantine had declared Sunday first half work free to make it easier for Christians in military and civil service to attend Holy Liturgy. This, according to one source, was actually before his conversion, because likely of his mother being a Christian already.
Theophanies in the OT were preincarnate Jesus Christ, sometimes the angel of God in such situations is Jesus, other times angels that are creatures not JEsus are what appeared. Jesus is not Michael the archangel, whose name means Who is Like God, which might be better understood as a question answer to which is, none, instead of a descriptor which would be interpretable as him being preincarnate Jesus disguised.
As regards when to keep the Sabbath, the NT—and even the Didachē—do not necessarily support Sunday “Sabbath”. There are a number of issues, but I’ll try to be brief. [Technical info is in brackets.]
ReplyDeleteBeginning with the Didachē, I have to admit I was taken aback by the transliterated Greek Rueben G. provided. Basically, it’s redundant, and doesn’t even have the word “day” in it! This led me to investigate for myself. My transliteration of the text below is just a bit different, though essentially the same [preferring “y” for the upsilon instead of “u” {reserving “u” to designate genitive}, and I’ve added an “n” {Greek nu}, which is found in Holmes’ version—these are not infrequently omitted]:
kata kyriakēn de kyriou
First, the de (but) is never placed first in any sentence, so it is, accordingly, after the accusative phrase kata kyriakēn. The kyriou is a genitive of kyrios (“Lord”) further describing/limiting the accusative. kyriakē(n) is the accusative form of kyriakos, which is an adjective meaning “pertaining to the Lord”. Thus, taking this word-for-word we have:
But, according-to {the} Lord’s of(-the)-Lord; or, But, according-to {the} Lord’s Lord’s
Because of this, the Georgian text tradition has the much more logically phrased: kath ēmeran kyriou = according to {the} day of(-the)-Lord. [The final “a” in “kata” is elided and the “t” is expanded to “th” (thēta) because the next word begins with a vowel.]
The word kyriokos is only found twice in the entire NT: in Revelation 1:10 (en tē̗ kyriakē̗ ēmera̗ = on the Lord’s Day) and 1Cor 11:20 (kyriakon deipnon = Lord’s Supper). On the Revelation passage, it is almost universally recognized as referring to Sunday—aka, Resurrection Day. But, that does not necessarily indicate the Sabbath was switched from Saturday to Sunday (Resurrection Day). On the Corinthians passage, the day on which the Lord’s Supper was/is to be held is not mentioned.
In Acts 20:7, they clearly met and “broke bread” on a particular Sunday. But that does not necessarily mean they were doing the “Lord’s Supper (kyriakos deipnos, or deipnos kyriakou), nor does it necessarily mean they were practicing a new weekly ritual understood to be on Sunday as opposed to Saturday. In fact, in Acts 2:46 they habitually “broke bread” in people’s houses, making no distinction regarding which day(s). On the other hand, Acts 2:1 indicates they were all together on the Day of Pentecost (Sunday), and one could possibly construe that Acts 2:42 is from that same day (“They continually devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching, and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.”). Yet again, this, to me, is much better seen as a new section, making a general statement, which makes better sense given the intervening context between this and 2:46.
[cont]
[cont]
ReplyDeleteI’ll quote from conservative scholar Darrell L. Bock from his Acts BECNT commentary in regards to 2:42:
The reference to breaking bread appears only twice in the NT, here and in Luke 24:35, where it refers merely to table fellowship [generally]. It is unclear here whether the phrase refers to the Lord’s Supper (so NLT) or is a reference to taking some meals together, of which the Lord’s Supper was a part. The verb κλάω (klaō, break) appears in Acts 2:46; 20:7, 11; and 27:35. In 2:46, the reference seems to be used broadly of meals, suggesting a broad use here [in 2:42] as well, although 20:7 appears to refer to the [Lord’s] table on the first day of the week. What makes the choice hard to decide is that the Lord’s table was part of a larger meal in the earliest church…Most of the references in this context seem broad, which would suggest a broad reference here [in 2:42]…Either way, the phrase suggests intimate interaction and mutual acceptance that was a part of community life (pp 150-51).
In any case, Got Questions has a few articles on and surrounding this:
https://www.gotquestions.org/Saturday-Sunday.html
https://www.gotquestions.org/Sabbath-day-rest.html
Myself, for a while I was attending a Saturday evening service—the “church” had services both days. And it wasn’t a Hebrew Roots, SDA, etc. It was an ‘evangelical’-type non-denominational “church”.
And one can even argue that NT Christians are not required to keep a “Sabbath” per se. But, that’s a whole different subject (and I see just now Christine mentioned it).
Christine,
ReplyDeleteThis exchange has got me thinking of Africa. More specifically the Nile. As in, you’re in DeNILE.
Dollar Brand (Abdullah Ibrahim) - African Marketplace
Booker Ervin - Home In Africa
And finally:
Charles Tolliver - On The Nile
…and:
Sun Ra Arkestra - Sunset On The Night On The River Nile
Fantastic music! Now, where was I? Oh yeah…
From the link you provided (and the 7th “ecumenical” council is not recognized by “Protestants”, so it is hardly “ecumenical”):
Icons are necessary and essential because they protect the full and proper doctrine of the Incarnation. While God cannot be represented in His eternal nature ("...no man has seen God", John 1:18), He can be depicted simply because He "became human and took flesh." Of Him who took a material body, material images can be made. In so taking a material body, God proved that matter can be redeemed. He deified matter, making it spirit-bearing, and so if flesh can be a medium for the Spirit, so can wood or paint, although in a different fashion.
The last part makes me think of the tikkun of Kabbalism (“God proved that matter can be redeemed. He deified matter…”), and the Gnostic and Kabbalistic notion of panentheism in general, as well as A. A. Bailey’s book The Consciousness of the Atom (and etc.).
I sure don’t need an icon of Jesus in order to adhere to “the full and proper doctrine of the Incarnation”. Scripture makes it clear enough, doesn’t it? This is man’s attempted justification for something clearly forbidden in Scripture.
Your claim—and the claim of the 7th council—is just not Scriptural in this aspect. How do we split the Trinity in such a fashion as to imply tritheism? That is, if the Father is YHWH and the Son is YHWH (see Jude 1:5, e.g.), why is the Father not permitted to be made into an icon while the Son is? What Scripture makes this distinction, providing this allowance?
You wrote: Theophanies in the OT were preincarnate Jesus Christ, sometimes the angel of God in such situations is Jesus, other times angels that are creatures not JEsus are what appeared…
EXACTLY! I was hoping you’d go down this route so that I could show you the fallacy of this whole thing. And Who is the One in the theophany of Deut 4:15-16 (as referenced in the RCC Catechism 2129)? It’s YHWH! And, given your position that theophanies were of the pre-incarnate Christ (I don’t disagree), then HOW CAN WE MAKE IMAGES OF THE INCARNATE CHRIST/YHWH? It’s a non sequitur to conclude that we are permitted to make icons of Jesus because God/YHWH made an image of Himself in the Person of Christ: Again, God did, but this scarcely gives us the right, for that would violate the First Commandment.
You are adhering to man’s tradition—at the expense of Scriptural mandate.
To: All
ReplyDeleteI will not be responding to "Reuben G." You can see his attitude. Let alone that he uses the Didache as if it were in the Bible (it's NOT) to top it off (and this is a real winner) he TOTALLY DISREGARDS "any 'answers' in the cut and paste article".
WHY?
HERE IS HIS BRILLIANT, FAIR & SCHOLARLY REASON (LOL):
"because no one read it!"
And as far as RayB, again you just need to do no more than simply look at how he CONTINUES to DISTRACT, DISTRACT & DISTRACT from:
The BIBLE PASSAGES WHICH STATE IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS...
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own [which was, of course, on the SEVENTH day]. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!"
Hebrews 4:9b-11 ABPE
"a Sabbath rest"
σαββατισμὸς
(sabbatismos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 4520:
A keeping of the Sabbath
"You see then that a man IS justified by works, and NOT by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!” (1 John 2:3-4).
"The saints...are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus."
Rev. 14:12 NKJV
~A COMPARISON~
Jesus And The Apostles (JATA)
#1) JATA: KEPT The Commandments
#2) JATA: KEPT the 7th Day Sabbath
#3) JATA: KEPT The Annual Holy Days - Passover, Days Of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Feast Of Trumpets, Day Of Atonement, Feast Of Tabernacles, The Last Great Day.
#4) JATA: Had Baptism By Immersion
#5) JATA: Laying On Of Hands
#6) JATA: KEPT God's Food Laws
#7) JATA: Etc.
Church Of God (COG)
#1) COG: KEEPS The Commandments
#2) COG: KEEPS the 7th Day Sabbath
#3) COG: KEEPS The Annual Holy Days - Passover, Days Of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Feast Of Trumpets, Day Of Atonement, Feast Of Tabernacles, The Last Great Day.
#4) COG: Has Baptism By Immersion
#5) COG: Laying On Of Hands
#6) COG: KEEPS God's Food Laws
#7) COG: Etc.
Q: Are any churches perfect?
A: Of course not, how ridiculous! If you're insisting on perfection you'll be looking for a church until the Second Coming!
But the good news is that anyone who has seen that there is indeed a New Testament basis for obeying God (for example in keeping His 7th Day Sabbath) thankfully has much to choose from!
Sabbath Keeping Churches - Sabbath Keeping Denominations
ReplyDeleteHere is a list of over 500 Sabbath keeping Churches of all different denominations:
List Of Sabbath Keeping Churches - Sabbath Keeping Denominations
As I said, I will not waste my breath with people with the attitudes of the hostile posters, however I WILL recommend to anyone that would SINCERELY desire to more fully understand Bible doctrines as put forth by Jesus and the Apostles in the first century and the reasons to STILL follow their ways of living and their ways of worship in the twenty-first, to simply read:
Faith And Doctrines Of The Early Church
By GM Bowers
Free PDF
(NOTE: Has some typos, etc., inadvertently gained from the transcription process not found in the original book.)
FAITH & DOCTRINES OF THE EARLY CHURCH - Book (PDF Format)
The Original Book
FAITH & DOCTRINES OF THE EARLY CHURCH - Book (Softcover)
For Further Research:
ReplyDeleteBibleSabbath.org
FriendsOfSabbath.org
GiveShare.org
The-Ten-Commandments.org
In conclusion, to reiterate:
What does the >BIBLE< say about the NEW Testament Body Of Believers?
"THE SAINTS...ARE THOSE THAT KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD"
Clear as a bell!
KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS
Revelation 14:12
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!” (1 John 2:3-4).
Isn't the seventh day Sunday?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteNotice that the "keep the commandments of God" is reduced, primarily, to obeying the OT Sabbath observance, which was SPECIFICALLY given to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL as a sign.
No one can be justified with God by the works of the Law, as Scripture clearly teaches.
Anon 4:09,
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Hebrew calendar--the one used in the OT--God rested on "Saturday" or Shabbat, which is the 7th day. See here:
Hebrew Days of the Week
Costi Hinn posted this today --
ReplyDelete"An NAR Recovery Roadmap"
With all sorts of links to information for discerning oneself out of NAR, Word of Faith and Prosperity Gospel heretical church systems.
http://www.forthegospel.org/nar-recovery-resource
Christintine said:
ReplyDelete"Craig, we are forbidden to make an image of The Father apparently or to make images that we worship as things in themselves as distinct from relative veneration of God or saints they represent, GOD HAS MADE HIS OWN IMAGE WHICH IS JESUS and we can make images of that image. "
What kind of logic is that? So, if God forbids something, and then He has to abide by that commandment? We are talking about God here, right? He is the Creator, and we are the creation, right?
I guess my question is: Is Christine infallable even when she speaks ex-cathedra?
Dr. Warns New COVID-19 Vaccine Is Untested And Will Alter Your DNA
ReplyDeleteDr Carrie Madej, an Internal Medicine Specialist claims that the COVID-19 Vaccine Could Be Trojan Horse To Patent Humans as it will change your DNA.
Dr Carrie Madej, DO is a Internal Medicine Specialist in McDonough, GA and has over 19 years of experience in the medical field. She graduated from Kansas City Univ Of Medicine Bioscience College Of Osteopathic Medicine medical school in 2001.
https://banned.video/watch?id=5f176746677a7f01e9302af6
Paul,
ReplyDeleteAre WE infallible even when WE speak Ex-Christina?
Is The Sabbath Only For The Children Of Israel?
ReplyDeleteNow the interesting fact that many have missed is that if you are not of Israel then you cannot be under the New Covenant as it was only made with Israel. You may now be thinking that cannot be, but it is and this is something that the majority do not understand.
Please allow me to explain...
http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/isthesabbathonlyforisrael.html
Christine Erikson asks the question, 'Why do scuba divers fall backwards to get into the water'?
ReplyDeleteCumbey replies, 'for crying out loud, Erikson, if they jumped forwards they'd still be in the boat.'
What people said about masks during 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic . . .
ReplyDeleteA different pandemic swept across the world a century ago, killing about 60 million people.
Schools and businesses closed, and many cities required people to wear face masks to slow the spread of the devastating influenza outbreak of 1918. And back then, just like today, some people balked at the idea of the government telling them what to do.
Some protested and totally defied local orders as World War I raged in Europe, J. Alexander Navarro, assistant director at the University of Michigan’s Center for the History of Medicine, wrote this month for The Conversation.
About 2,000 members of the so-called Anti-Mask League gathered in San Francisco in 1919 “for a rally denouncing the mask ordinance and proposing ways to defeat it,” Navarro wrote.
Sound familiar?
Face masks have been a political and cultural flash point in the United States as the country struggles to contain the coronavirus pandemic, which has killed more than 140,000 people in the country since March.
In Michigan, some people carried assault rifles into the state Capitol building this spring to protest the governor’s orders, drawing international attention. Similar protests have played out in cities across the country.
During the flu pandemic, which killed 675,000 Americans in 1918 and 1919, “noncompliance and outright defiance quickly became a problem,” Navarro wrote of face-mask mandates. “Many businesses, unwilling to turn away shoppers, wouldn’t bar unmasked customers from their stores. Workers complained that masks were too uncomfortable to wear all day.”
Much like today, some people pleaded for compliance. Headlines from Chicago newspapers in 1919 declared, “Open-face sneezers to be arrested.” “Police raid saloons in war on influenza; Keep church windows open.” “’Nonessential’ crowds barred in epidemic war.”
In an October 1918 advertisement in the Oakland (California) Tribune, the Red Cross said, “A gauze mask is 99% proof against influenza.” The ad continued: “Doctors wear them. Those who do not wear them get sick. The man or woman or child who will not wear a mask now is a dangerous slacker.”
The 1918 pandemic started in the spring, but did not raise many alarms until that fall, killing more than 20 million people in a matter of weeks in October and November, according to the National Archives.
“The scale of the disease created mass panic. Churches and schools were closed, while local businesses and services that remained opened struggled with staff shortages. Too frightened to go out in public, people isolated themselves in their homes, leaving the streets nearly empty,” the National Archives said.
In late November 1918, The Rocky Mountain News in Denver quoted the city’s mayor as he called for everyone to wear face masks: “The wearer is not only protecting himself, but is protecting others. It is the moral obligation of every person to wear a mask in a street car or in a store.”
Health experts have made similar morality pleas amid coronavirus: If you won’t wear a mask for yourself, do it for others, they say.
“Cloth face coverings are meant to protect other people in case the wearer is unknowingly infected but does not have symptoms,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said.
So how did Denver’s mandate go over 102 years ago? It “was almost totally ignored by the people; in fact, the order was cause of mirth,” according to a report from the Rocky Mountain News at the time.
HTTPS://WWW.CHARLOTTEOBSERVER.COM/NEWS/CORONAVIRUS/ARTICLE244267462.HTML
To: All
ReplyDeleteJust a note to avoid any possible confusion in the future: I had put a chart comparing JATA (Jesus And The Apostles) with the COG (Church Of God) and therefore I find it now necessary to mention that that COG most emphatically does NOT INCLUDE the so-named MWSCOG which has appears to have a number of the aforementioned COG's basic doctrines BUT has added such things as these...
"Beliefs and practices
"The church believes in God the Father and God the Mother,[9] claiming to be restoring the truth and practices of the early Church.[3] The church also believes that co-founder Jang Gil-ja is God the Mother, as taught by the founder Ahn Sahng-hong.[10]
"The World Mission Society Church of God believes that all of its teachings are based on the Bible, as explained in the numerous books written by Ahn Sahng-hong.
"Second coming of Christ
"The Church believes that Ahn Sahng-hong is the Second Coming of Jesus, who came with a new name, the name of the Holy Spirit and it states that he fulfilled biblical prophecies that only Jesus could have fulfilled.[11]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Mission_Society_Church_of_God
'The Day Of The Lord' isn't Sunday but is rather the time of God's judgment on the world (John was 'in' the yet-to-be Day Of The Lord via a vision: "I was IN THE SPIRIT on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, saying, 'I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,' and, 'What you see, write in a book...'" Rev. 1:10-11a
ReplyDelete"The Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up." (Peter 3:10)
-And if one WAS going to call a particular day of the WEEK 'The Lord's Day':
"For the Son of Man is Lord of the SABBATH."
https://biblehub.com/matthew/12-8.htm
Anon 4:36 PM,
ReplyDeleteThere's a distinction in the Greek between "the Day of the Lord" (hēmera kyriou / hē hēmera tou kyriou -- 1 Peter 3:10 / 2 Thess 2:2, and etc.) and "the Lord's Day" (tē kyriakē hēmera). See my posts @ 12:33 & 12:37 PM above for the difference between kyrios (noun) and kyriakos (adjective; though I misspelled this as kyriokos).
This distinction is carried out in early church writings, as well, with the former referring to eschatology ("the Day of the Lord"), the latter to the first day of the week, aka Resurrection Day, aka Sunday ("the Lord's Day"), thereby confirming the difference.
FAQ: What is the "Lord's Day" of Revelation 1:10?
ReplyDeleteThe Bible leaves no record of the first-century church worshipping or celebrating the resurrection on Sunday. Sometimes Revelation 1:10—"I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice"—is used as biblical authority for calling Sunday "the Lord's Day." Notice, however, that this verse does not say the "first day of the week" or "Sunday" is what John calls "the Lord's day."
We must remember two vital facts about the book of Revelation: First, it is a book of prophecy primarily concerning the time of Christ's coming and the events that lead up to it (Revelation 1:1-3, 7). Second, it is written by a Jew steeped in the language of the Old Testament. To him, the phrase en teé kuriakeé heeméra ("on the Lord's day")—and its Hebrew or Aramaic equivalent—would imply what is called in the Old Testament "the Day of the Lord," the time of the coming destruction that climaxes in the return of Christ (Isaiah 13:6, 9; Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11, 31; Amos 5:18; etc.).
In the introduction to E.W. Bullinger's Commentary on Revelation, he explains definitively that the "Lord's day" in Revelation 1:10 is not talking about the first day of the week:
In [Revelation 1:10] we are told that John saw and received this revelation on "the Lord's Day." Leaving the former part of this verse for the present, let us notice the latter expression, "the Lord's Day." 4
The majority of people, being accustomed from their infancy to hear the first day of the week called the Lord's Day, conclude in their own minds that that day is thus called in [Revelation 1:10] because that was the name of it. But the contrary is the fact: the day is so called by us because of this verse.
In the New Testament this day is always called "the first day of the week." (See Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2 2, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; I Corinthians 16:2.) Is it not strange that in this one place a different expression is thought to refer to the same day? And yet, so sure are the commentators that it means Sunday, that some go as far as to say it was "Easter Sunday," and it is for this reason that Revelation 1:10-19 is chosen in the New Lectionary of the Church of England as the 2nd Lesson for Easter Sunday morning.
There is no evidence of any kind that "the first day of the week" was ever called "the Lord's Day" before the Apocalypse was written. That it should be so called afterwards is easily understood, and there can be little doubt that the practice arose from the misinterpretation of these words in [Revelation 1:10]. It is incredible that the earliest use of a term can have a meaning which only subsequent usage makes intelligible.
On the contrary, it ceased to be called by its Scripture name ("the First day of the week"), not because of any advance of Biblical truth or reverence, but because of declension from it. The Greek "Fathers" of the [mainstream professing Christian] Church were converts from Paganism: and it is not yet sufficiently recognized how much of Pagan rites and ceremonies and expressions they introduced into the Church; and how far Christian ritual was elaborated from and based upon Pagan ritual by the Church of Rome. Especially is this seen in the case of baptism.5
ReplyDeleteIt was these Fathers who, on their conversion, brought the title "Sunday" into the Church from the Pagan terminology which they had been accustomed to use in connection with their Sun-worship.
Justin Martyr (114-165 AD) in his second Apology (i.e., his second defense of Christianity), says, 6 in chap. 67. on "The weekly worship of the Christians," - "On the day called SUN-DAY all who live in the country gather together to one place... SUN-DAY is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of SATURN [i.e., Saturn's day]; and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the SUN, having appeared to his apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration."
It is passing strange that if John called the first day of the week "the Lord's Day," we find no trace of the use of such a title until a hundred years later. And that though we do find a change, it is to "Sunday," and not the "the Lord's Day" - a name which has become practically universal.7
Some Christians still perpetuate the name of the Lord's Day for Sunday: but it is really the survival of a Pagan name, with a new meaning, derived from a misunderstanding of [Revelation 1:10].
Objection has been taken to the interpretation of "the Lord's Day" here, because we have (in [1:10]) the adjective "Lord's" instead of the noun (in regimen), "of the Lord," as in the Hebrew. But what else could it be called in Hebrew? Such objectors do not seem to be aware of the fact that there is no adjective for "Lord's" in Hebrew; and therefore the only way of expressing "the Lord's Day" is by using the two nouns, "the day of the Lord" - which means equally "the Lord's Day" (Jehovah's day). It is useless, therefore, to make any objection on this ground; for if a Hebrew wanted to say "the Lord's Day," he must say "the day of the Lord."
In the Greek there are two ways of expressing this (as in modern languages); either by saying literally, as in Hebrew, "the day of the Lord" (using the two nouns); or by using the adjective "Lord's" instead. It comes to exactly the same thing as to signification; the difference lies only in the emphasis.
The natural way of qualifying a noun is by using an adjective, as here - (kyriakee) Lord's; and, when this is done, the emphasis takes its natural course, and is placed on the noun thus qualified ("day"). But when the emphasis is required to be placed on the word "Lord;" then, instead of the adjective, the noun would be used in the genitive case, "of the Lord." In the former case (as in [Revelation 1:10]), it would be "the Lord's DAY." In the latter case it would be "THE LORD'S day." The same day is meant in each case, but with a different emphasis.
ReplyDeleteBy way of illustration and proof, we may call attention to the fact that we have the corresponding expressions concerning another "day." In Luke 17:22 we have "the days of the Son of Man," where the emphasis must be on "THE SON OF MAN" (as shown by the context). While in I Corinthians 4:3 we have "man's DAY," with the emphasis on "day," marking that "day" as being actually present, as it now is. This is so clear from the context that it is actually translated "judgment," which is exactly what it means. The apostle says - "It is a very small thing, that I should be judged of you, or of man's DAY." The emphasis is on day, because the time in which we now live is the time, or "day," when man is judging. Another day is coming, and that is the day when the Lord will be present, and He will be the judge. This is the reason why the adjective (anthropinee) man's is used in I Corinthians 4:3; and this is why (kyriakee), Lord's is used in Revelation 1:9. So far from the use of the adjective being an argument against our conclusion, it is an argument in favor of it. For what is the "DAY of the Lord" or "the LORD'S day"? The first occurrence of the expression (which is the key to its meaning) is in Isaiah 2:11.8 It is the day when "the lofty looks of man shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the Lord alone shall be exalted.
That is the one great object of all the future events, seen by John in vision, and recorded for us in the Apocalypse.
...
http://www.sabbath.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Basics.FAQ/ID/168/What-is-Lords-Day--Revelation-1-10.htm
Anon 6:42,44,46 PM,
ReplyDeleteThis issue is not necessarily an understanding of "Sabbath" as opposed to "Sunday" (being anachronistic for the moment for convenience' sake), understood as the day of the week of Jesus' resurrection (and especially not the actual day of Jesus' Resurrection, aka "Easter"), that is, the first day of the week. I've not stated that Rev 1:10 indicates that the term used there was meant to replace "the Lord's day" with the Sabbath. Let's not conflate the two issues.
Now, to the claims in the article you cite. First, though I generally respect Bullinger's scholarship, he is not always right (and none of us are). In this case, the evidence does not support him. Nor does the Biblical evidence support the overall claims.
As to the use of two Hebrew nouns for "the Day of the Lord", this is true (yom yhwh); however, every time the LXX translates these words it is with the usual hēmera kyriou / hē hēmera tou kyriou, as noted above. And this is carried over into the NT. Thus, it's curious John the Revelator didn't use this same convention if his intention was to indicate the eschatological "Day of the Lord". There must be a reason for the distinction. What I presented above makes the most sense.
Thank you but I wasn't attempting to conflate the issue but merely pointing out that if John had wanted to call a day of the week The Lord's Day he would've chosen the Day Jesus is Lord of.
ReplyDeleteAnon 7:59 PM,
ReplyDeleteI stated that because the link you provided is under the heading “Sabbath”. Thus, it is an attempt to uphold “Saturday” Sabbath, which is fine in and of itself, but it seems that it is using its interpretation of Rev 1:10 in an attempt to refute a “Sunday” Sabbath. I say, let the context speak for itself when viewed in its immediate context, the larger context of the book of Revelation, and the larger context of Scripture in general. The usage in Rev 1:10 is unique and completely at odds with the phraseology of the eschatological “the Day of the Lord” of other Scripture, which likely indicates it means something different.
In any case, I didn’t plan on getting into a long debate on this subject, but even the claim here falls short:
The natural way of qualifying a noun is by using an adjective, as here - (kyriakee) Lord's; and, when this is done, the emphasis takes its natural course, and is placed on the noun thus qualified ("day"). But when the emphasis is required to be placed on the word "Lord;" then, instead of the adjective, the noun would be used in the genitive case, "of the Lord." In the former case (as in [Revelation 1:10]), it would be "the Lord's DAY." In the latter case it would be "THE LORD'S day." The same day is meant in each case, but with a different emphasis.
This appears to be an imposition of English upon the Greek. Greek is a highly inflected language, which means all the words are conjugated in such specific ways that the function of the word within a sentence is made clear just by its spelling. This means that words can be placed almost anywhere in a given sentence. That’s not to say there isn’t a typical ordering. There is. So, when a word is placed ahead of another (or when one that’s typically earlier in a sentence is placed further back), emphasis is (or may be) implied. In any given adjective-noun combination, either one can precede the other. Typically, the one in front is emphatic.
Given this, the quote above has it exactly backwards, which then makes the rest wrong. In the phraseology used for “the Day of the Lord”, two nouns are used—one (day) followed by a genitive (Lord), the latter delimiting the former. It’s not just any “Day”, so which “Day”? “Day of the Lord”. So, “Day” in “Day of the Lord” (which means “time” of the Lord, as opposed to one single day) is the one emphasized. Same with “Days of the Son of Man” (Luke 17:22): All are nouns, and all are in the genitive as part of a prepositional phrase. Since “Days” comes first, this is the head noun, with “Son” and “Man” each delimiting “Days” in a chain. Which “Days”? “Days of the Son”. Which “Son”? “The Son of Man”.
But even this is an over-simplification. Is the genitive noun objective or subjective in relation to its head noun? See here:
https://mcluhansnewsciences.com/mcluhan/2014/10/objective-and-subjective-genitives/
I think that a translation rather than the original may lie at the bottom of any textual difficulty:
ReplyDelete"And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS"
Did Jesus Have A Tattoo On His Thigh In Revelation 19:16?
By Ann Naffziger
09/27/2013
The verse in question here is the only verse in the New Testament that appears to suggest that Jesus had something “inscribed” on his body. However, such a suggestion is in direct contradiction of a law in Leviticus 19:28 “You shall not make any gashes in your flesh for the dead or tattoo any marks upon you.” Not only would the idea of a Jewish man having a tattoo be shocking, even more so is the suggestion that his thigh would be exposed, something basically equated with public nudity in Jesus’ time and religious culture.
A theory that easily explains such a contradiction is that the book of Revelation was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek as previously assumed. If that is the case, a miniscule copying error by an early scribe would easily render the Hebrew word for “banner” as “thigh” instead. The first Hebrew letter for the word “banner”, dagel, looks almost exactly like the first Hebrew letter for “thigh”, ragel. So it is posited that the correct reading of Rev 19:16 is
“And He has on His robe and on His banner a name inscribed, ‘KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS’”
https://bustedhalo.com/questionbox/did-jesus-have-a-tattoo-on-his-thigh-in-revelation-1916
P.S. Ditto the Parakletos issue in Matthew...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kingdomofyisrael.org/s/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Hebrew-Gospel-of-MATTHEW-by-George-Howard-Part-One.pdf
Pushing that 'Hebrew original' thing hard, aren't you?
ReplyDeleteThe Revelation passage is easily parsed out. If you read some English translations, you see that the title appears to be written twice: once on his thigh, and once on his garment. That makes little sense to me. A much better solution is to understand the phrase epexegetically: "on His garment, namely (kai) his thigh." That is, the text is on His garment at the area where it would be visible when he was perched atop the horse.
Coincidentally, I'm in the midst of writing an article on paraklētos in the NT. But the term is not even found in Matthew. And it wasn't even used very much in antiquity, either. And are you seriously going to post a pdf of an entire book, expecting readers here to read it?
Arguments from lack of physical evidence is not a good place to start making any sort of case. And, please don't bring up the verbiage in Eusebius. We've already been down that route.
Let's get closer to topics more closely associated with this blogspot.
My apologies, I inadvertently mentioned The Hebrew Book Of Matthew as regards to Parakletos when it was on the same topic (the Trinity) but yes indeed not the same part of that topic. And no, I didn't honestly expect people to read the whole Hebrew Gospel Of Matthew(!) [Not that reading the Bible is such a bad thing] but had just put it there handy simply for those who might've wanted to see what it said about the subject. And regarding the Trinity doctrine although not mentioning Parakletos, this is my sole point I'd like to make here about what it does have to offer on the topic:
ReplyDeleteWe now have the Hebrew Matthew Gospel, a manuscript that was preserved by the Jews from the first century [Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew Gospel]. In this Shem Tov MSS, the text at Matthew 28:19 does not contain the so-called Trinitarian statement.
OTHER BIBLE TRANSLATIONS FOR MATTHEW 28:19
The following PDF has been complied by Grzegorz Kaszyński and has 80 other versions of Matthew 28:19 that do not say "Father, Son and Holy Spirit." Download PDF for Matthew 28:19 here: http://www.trinitytruth.org/matthew28_19bible-translations.pdf
We went through this article at a bit of length before and (as you say) don't want to do a rehash now but I just wanted to reinforce the point that although we are used to using the Greek manuscripts we must nevertheless be at least open to the usage of others.
http://www.trinitytruth.org/matthew28_19addedtext.html
(A related article just for those who might be interested:)
History of The Original Hebrew Book Of Matthew
https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/406-history-of-hebrew-version-of-matthew.html
As far as the Book Of Revelation matter goes, although what you theorized does seem to have some merit (No offense!) but I think frankly that (at least right now) what Naffziger mentions seems to make a more convincing explanation.
Anon 2:52 AM,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote (citing another work?):
We now have the Hebrew Matthew Gospel, a manuscript that was preserved by the Jews from the first century [Shem Tov's Hebrew Matthew Gospel]. In this Shem Tov MSS, the text at Matthew 28:19 does not contain the so-called Trinitarian statement.
No we don’t. There is no first century Hebrew MSS of Matthew. What we have is Shem Tov’s reconstruction of what he thinks is Matthew’s Gospel in Hebrew.
As regards Matthew 28:19 and the Trinitarian statement there, I’d seen Kaszyński’s work referenced before and engaged with it. I don’t recall if it was on this particular blogspot or if it was on another that I’d engaged on that was from an anti-Trinitarian perspective. In any case, the author references a number of what amounts to duplicates in his claim that there are 80 different versions without the tri-statement. Whatever the case, there are 2 issues related to this, which I’ll identify.
(1) Comparatively, in some other places in Scripture there are hundreds, if not thousands of MSS supporting one reading, yet the near-universal understanding is that the less attested reading is original. These more numerous readings come about by later scribes dutifully replicating the (presumed) error in their (exemplar) manuscripts. Thus, lack of evidence in some MSS when compared with the presence of a reading in other MSS is not the sole reasoning for the acceptance or non-acceptance of a particular reading.
(2) Even if the tri-statement is rejected, that is, it is declared to be non-original, Trinitarian doctrine does not rise or fall on this one verse. Far from it.
You wrote: As far as the Book Of Revelation matter goes, although what you theorized does seem to have some merit (No offense!) but I think frankly that (at least right now) what Naffziger mentions seems to make a more convincing explanation.
No offense taken. But I have to question your rationale. The use of the Greek conjunction kai in epexegetical constructions is fairly common in the NT. Given this, why would you reason that a Hebrew original is the more logical explanation? This is especially odd after I illustrated that the claim you cited earlier asserting that a Greek adjective-noun is the best way to translate a Hebrew noun-noun in the “Day of the Lord” is not true, but that the LXX renders the phrase as noun-(genitive)noun as is mirrored in the NT. It seems to me you just wish to eisegetically advance a Hebrew original, as opposed to really searching for the truth of the matter.
Again, let’s get back to topics more close to those usually presented on this blog.
Please desist from your personal hobby horse.
An archbishop recently said the Pope established a "new Church" that worships Mother Earth.
ReplyDeleteI am an indigenous/native peoples' rights advocate who has received support for my advocacy initiatives from several internationally renowned Native activists. Three paragraphs from a new article of mine are presented below.
The Roman Catholic magazine, the Crisis, published an article about the October 2019 Amazon synod. The article is titled "The Amazon Synod Goes Native." Its renowned author, William Kilpatrick, writes in the article (after researching what prominent Bishops are saying) that this synod established a "new Church," with an "Indians' eco-friendly [eco-tribalist], pantheistic form of spirituality," which is "New Age spirituality," whose adherents embrace and promote "the [hippie] ideas that became popular 60 years ago, a time when many young people thought that the 'Age of Aquarius' was about to dawn."
A good subtitle for Mr. Kilpatrick's article on the Amazon Synod would have been "The Catholic Church Goes Hippie." Cardinal Gerhard Mueller has criticized an Amazon synod document for its “hippie” language, such as “ecological conversion” and “mother earth.” Bishop Robertus Mutsaertsis condemned the Amazon Synod for attempting to establish a "new religion" by portraying Jesus "not as the Son of God and Savior," but as " Jesus the philosopher, revolutionary and hippie."
Pan-Amazon Synod Watch (PSW) is the name of the largest coalition of associations in defense of Christian civilization. It claims that the Pan-Amazon synod is "a tool to impose a radical eco-tribalist model on the Holy Catholic Church and civic society." A statement in a PSW article reads: Quoting abundantly from his encyclical Laudato Si, Pope Francis reiterates his “Teilhardian” and New Age worldview of a universe in which “everything is connected” (No. 41).
The title of my new article is "Pope Francis Preaches Eco-Tribalist | Hippie New Age Beliefs." It is located at: http://www.towahkon.org/BishopsHippiesNewAge.html
Speaking of a personal hobby horse, in rides TID.
ReplyDeleteHi Craig. Sorry I gave you that feeling! I'm just very interested in the topic and pursued it a bit more than usual as I desired your further feedback on it (as I value and appreciate your feedback)! Thank you for it. I was going to reply to your latest points here however in deference to your expressed wishes on second thought I will instead conclude the topic with you personally.
ReplyDeleteSo now Craig, onto another topic:
Jesus the revolutionary hippie philosopher...
Jesus the revolutionary hippie philosopher
ReplyDeleteOn second thought I'll pass.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 2:52 AM is the very same "Anonymous" that is obsessed with promoting one heresy after another.
ReplyDeleteHe attempted to push his "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew" on the previous blog thread .... I answered him with this:
RayB said @ 7:52 PM (on previous thread, in part):
"Why would there be any value in reading the "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew," written by a man that denied the deity and messiahship of Jesus Christ?"
Here is what I found out about the heretic Shem-Tob, the author of the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew:
"Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut was the AUTHOR OF AN ANTI-CHRISTIAN religious treatise, "The Touchstone," completed in 1380 and revised in 1385 and 1400. Often referred to as "The Logic of Shem Tob", it ARGUES AGAINST THE BELIEF THAT JESUS IS GOD. It also argues against attributing the role of Messiah to Jesus. IT ALSO ARGUES AGAINST ATTRIBUTING THE ROLE OF MESSIAH TO JESUS." (Block letters used for emphasis).
"Shem-Tob's "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew," is included in his "The Touchtone," and is considered to be the oldest surviving text of a New Testament book in HEBREW."
NOTE: everything this Anonymous Armstronger posts is either representative of the teachings of a heretical cult, or, as evidenced above, elevating an author that held to heretical views of Jesus's Deity, who also denied His Messiahship. Shem-Tob HATED Biblical Christianity, and worked to destroy it through subversion. Obviously, our Annoymous Armstrong friend is in the same boat with Shem-Tob.
To: All
ReplyDeleteHere is part of what I had originally posted that our very own Sherlock Holmes has 'discovered', LOL:
The "Hebrew text of Matthew’s gospel was preserved in the body of a 14th century Jewish polemical treatise entitled Evan Bohar. The author of the treatise, one by the name of Shem Tov Ben Isaac Ben Shaprut, completed his work in 1385 A.D. and revised it several times afterwards. He utilized nine different Hebrew manuscripts of the preserved Gospel of Matthew to compile his translation. Ben Shaprut was no Christian. He was a Jewish rabbi who was writing to defend his faith against the encroachments of Christian theologians. To counter-act the teachings of Matthew, he used Matthew’s original Hebrew Gospel, and carefully compiled his translation."
Obviously, our deductively-challenged RayB friend is in the same boat with Inspector Clouseau.
LMAO!
P.S. And of course he implies that I was, in effect, endorsing the views of the "polemical treatise entitled Evan Bohar". Hardly that! Just letting folks know about the existence of the Hebrew Gospel Of Matthew itself (an additional resource that's all) of which the Rabbi had gotten by "utilizing nine different Hebrew manuscripts of the preserved Gospel of Matthew to compile his translation." "and carefully compiled his translation" (presumably so as to naturally base his rebuttals on the most accurate basis possible, although of course that doesn't mean that what we have now is necessarily perfect) which was extracted FROM the misguided treatise itself! That is all that the fuss is about! ROFL!!
ReplyDeleteP.P.S. And I might add that the ACTUALLY scholarly Susanna was DELIGHTED to be told about this book way back when I mentioned it earlier, so much so that she posted that she had immediately bought a copy. Add her to those "elevating an author that held to heretical views of Jesus's Deity, who also denied His Messiahship. Shem-Tob HATED Biblical Christianity, and worked to destroy it through subversion." Obviously, our Roman Catholic friend Susanna is in the same boat with Shem-Tob!
ReplyDeleteLMAO
P.P.P.S. Again you just need to do no more than simply look at how he CONTINUES to DISTRACT, DISTRACT & DISTRACT from:
ReplyDeleteThe BIBLE PASSAGES WHICH STATE IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS...
"It REMAINS for the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH. For whoever enters his rest has rested from his works as God has from His own [which was, of course, on the SEVENTH day]. Let us take pains, therefore, to enter that rest, lest we fall in the manner of those who were not persuaded!"
Hebrews 4:9b-11 ABPE
"a Sabbath rest"
σαββατισμὸς
(sabbatismos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 4520:
A keeping of the Sabbath
"You see then that a man IS justified by works, and NOT by faith only."
James 2:24 NKJV
"For the hearers of the law are not righteous before God, but the DOERS of the law will be justified."
Romans 2:13 CAB
What does the >BIBLE< say about the NEW Testament Body Of Believers?
"THE SAINTS...ARE THOSE THAT KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD"
KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS
Revelation 14:12
1 John 2:3-4
“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a LIAR, and the truth is not in him!”
Shouldn't you be celebrating RayB?
ReplyDeleteAfter all -
"We therefore realise that one should never underestimate the deceptions of Satan and know that he always attacks truth and especially what affects our salvation."
Thus, attacks just prove you are right, right?
(Yes, IT WASN'T RayB that attacked out of the blue, it was the one that he attacked that was the attacker!)
ReplyDeleteLOL!
ReplyDeleteEPIC TEENAGE TRUTH BOMB!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.citizenfreepress.com/column-2/high-school-girl-unloads-blm-truth-bomb-im-done-with-your-racist-bullshit
He(a)rd immunity?
ReplyDeleteYou Decide
ReplyDeleteLook, let's quit messing around. This Plandemic, I mean, Pandemic, is extremely serious and we all need to follow our experts, such as America's leading expert on all things related to COVID 19, Dr. Fauci.
Forget about what he said before, you need to be like him; wear the mask, practice social distancing (and scold those that don't, even at the risk of being called a "snowflake," or worse, a "Karen"), and wash your hands.
Trustworthy Dr. Fauci leads us by his inspirational example (go to the end of the story):
https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2020/07/20/anthony-fauci-to-throw-first-pitch-for-washington-nationals-season-opener/
ReplyDeleteGod's people do, by His GRACE, driven by the faith OF Christ, keep His commandments, i.e. the "word of God."
“But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” Luke 11:28
"Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." 1 Corinthians 2:13
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:" Ephesians 6:17
"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;" 1 Timothy 6:3
"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."
John 6:63
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 4:01 PM ....
Once again, please state which OLD TESTAMENT Laws/Commandments that you choose to obey, and which do you ignore?
If you seek to be justified by THE LAW, you are bound to KEEP THE ENTIRE LAW ... not just those that your teachers have told you to follow, such as the rules governing the OT Sabbath.
When Christ's disciples picked the corn on the Sabbath, were they violating the OT Sabbath laws? What do you have to say about that?
ReplyDeleteCovington Catholic High School student Nick Sandmann WINS ANOTHER ONE ... this time he wins against the slanderous Washington Post as the lying slime at the WaPo agree to pay a settlement.
"2 down and 6 more to go"
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/wapo-settles-250-million-lawsuit-covington-teen-nick-sandmann
I told you Bill Gates was a good guy and your conspiracy theories have been debunked.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.marketwatch.com/story/almost-half-of-republicans-believe-a-debunked-conspiracy-theory-about-bill-gates-heres-his-response-2020-07-23?siteid=yhoof2
He and their foundation are throwing millions of dollars at this Covid problem and instead of being grateful, everyone's gotta be a suspicious hater.
Pray for Bill Gates.
As I said already RayB, don't bother asking me any more questions. You're re-asking a question that I've already answered at length (much to paul's delight) and you're STILL issuing edicts.
ReplyDeletePlay your games with someone else.
Anonymous @ 8:23 PM:
ReplyDeleteSimple questions:
When Christ's disciples picked the corn on the Sabbath, were they violating the OT Sabbath Laws?
In order to be justified with God, do YOU have to keep the entire Old Testament Law, or just part of it?
If you don't keep the ENTIRE OT Law, which do you choose to ignore, and WHY?
For those newer readers who may be wondering why RayB has a stick up his where the sun don't shine:
ReplyDeleteMartin Luther: The UNFINISHED Reformation
Martin Luther: The UNFINISHED Reformation (Video)
ReplyDeleteExcellent video report by James Corbett regarding the "packaging and selling" of the global "Pandemic" by professional propagandists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmWDUmFV6yY
I guess the media would say this is a "peaceful protest" while exercising their idea of "Democracy," i.e., "you got what I want, I take what I want" ....
ReplyDeleteFather Daughter Violently Beaten at Deli in de Blasio's New York City ....
This is what is coming to America on a massive scale if the Marxists at BLM & ANTIFA, etc. get their way.
https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2020/07/25/father-daughter-violently-beaten-nyc-deli/
Erasing Margaret Sanger from Planned Parenthood doesn’t change abortion’s eugenic logic
ReplyDeletehttps://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2020/07/22/margaret-sanger-feminism-planned-parenthood-abortion-eugenics
Brilliant! In response to HR 7573, “Rep. Louie Gohmert pulled off a master troll on the House Floor introducing a resolution to ban the Democrat party for their history of slavery.”
ReplyDeleteRep. Gohmert Introduces Bill to BAN Democrat Party for Their History of Slavery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrVscRrwo34 start 10 minutes time stmp before that they are getting the chat set up. Icons, Idols & Iconoclasm - Jay Dyer / Snek I think RayB gets his notion about Jesus' body changing from Turettin. This is a gnostic idea basically.
ReplyDeleteThe Lord's Day is SUNDAY the day He rose on and beginning of the new creation (the old creation began on the first day of the week). II Cor. 16:10 refers to the first day of the week as if it were routine. ditto Acts 20:7.
Sunday isn't the sabbath the seventh day that God rested on, and commemorating His being the sole creator. Constantine helped an existing practice of first day of the week worship when he made the first day first half work free. the sabbath is among the tings we don't observe says Col. 2:16, because (contet preceding) it is one of those things that point to Christ's coming, but now He is come.
"'given your position that theophanies were of the pre-incarnate Christ (I don’t disagree), then HOW CAN WE MAKE IMAGES OF THE INCARNATE CHRIST/YHWH?"
BECAUSE HE HAS BECOME PHYSICAL. duh.
"It’s a non sequitur to conclude that we are permitted to make icons of Jesus because God/YHWH made an image of Himself in the Person of Christ:"
says who?
"How do we split the Trinity in such a fashion as to imply tritheism? That is, if the Father is YHWH and the Son is YHWH (see Jude 1:5, e.g.), why is the Father not permitted to be made into an icon while the Son is? What Scripture makes this distinction, providing this allowance?"
How is this splitting the Trinity? they are distinct persons though one substance and coeternal and coomnipresent. Is it splitting the Trinity to distinguish them as they were distinguished in the defense of the Trinity against anti trinitarians, the pro trinitarians saying The Father is without origin. The Son and The Holy Spirit each haveir divine substance and nature from the Father independently of each other, but while they originate in The Father they are coeternal with him there was never a time when either of them did not exist.
Why no image of The Father? Because He is too brilliant and too incomprehensible and so forth. He has no imge except what He made His Son to be, you can sort of refer to Him like the image of Jesus' baptism.
you may not need an icon to support the incarnation in your mind, but it nonetheless testifies of it, and testifies that God uses matter and blessed matter and made matter, the source of evil is not in the realm of matter, which is good to neutral, but of spirit, where bad intentions begin, played out in the realm of matter. AND EVERYONE ISN'T YOU.
paul, your question is so incoherent and doesn't sound like you understand my statement I can't answer it, please rephrase? Are you saying God is or isn't bound by His own rules? do you even understand those rules?
protestant acceptance or rejection of a council has no bearing on it being ecumenical, you guys qualify as somewhat heretical ditto Roman Catholicism so you don't count anyway. Also you didn't exist back then. (don't drag up bogomils and similar cathars, who denied the goodness of the material universe and denied the real presence in the Eucharist, contrary to Luther on both points the denial prots are used to is Calvin more than Luther influence.)
Thank you Christine for that Sunday morning day of sunshine!😎
ReplyDeleteChristine,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote (in part): How is this splitting the Trinity? they are distinct persons though one substance and coeternal and coomnipresent.
In speaking of the ‘Persons’, we cannot separate Christ’s substance (ousia, as in one common homoousios) from His humanity, can we? That would imply Nestorianism, as you well know. A statue depicting His humanity at the expense of His Deity does just that. Similarly, in efforts to maintain the integrity of Christ’s Divine-human Person, we cannot separate His substance (ousia) from the one Trinitarian substance (homoousios), can we? That would be separating the Trinity, implying tritheism. Yet this is precisely what is entailed in a Christ-statute if Nestorianism is to be averted, while simultaneously claiming said statue does not depict any other ‘Person’ of the Trinity.
Claiming that a Christ-statue poses no problem to Christian orthodoxy is a matter of wanting your Christological and Trinitarian cake and eating it too. It amounts to heresy.
Let me restate a portion of the Gerald O’Collins quote from earlier, while also filling in the portion I initially placed in an ellipse (italics in original, bold added):
“How then are the divine relationships crucial and unique? They are just that because being person in God is defined only through relationship to the other persons. (Here the finite model of personhood does call for adjustment.) The three divine persons are mutually distinct only in and through their relations of origin. The internal relations between the three persons form their sole distinguishing feature. We can and should, for instance, follow Athanasius in holding that whatever we can say about the Father we can also say about the Son except that He is the Father. The Son retains his own particular, irreducible identity in relationship, as being begotten of the Father and not as being the unoriginated origin of divinity (and all reality). Thus, the (subsistent) relations account for what differentiates (and unites) the one trinitarian reality” (The Tripersonal God: Understanding and Interpreting the Trinity [Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1999], p 178).
So, given that relations of origin is the sole distinguishing feature in Trinitarian relationships, then:
(a) how can we make a statue of Jesus without collapsing the Trinity in attempting to avert Nestorianism [retaining Christ’s Divine-human ‘Person’] so as not to imply the inclusion of the substance (ousia) of the Father (or the Spirit),
(b) how can we make a statue of Jesus without expressly committing the Nestorian heresy [upholding only Christ’s humanity at the expense of the His Deity, the common homoousios] in order to avoid any notions of tritheism?
Whatever one makes of icons generally (whole different topic), we cannot make an analogy between a statue of, say, Athanasius to one of Christ because of the differentiating factor of Christ’s Deity. To look past this is to be short-sighted.